Message from @mineyful
Discord ID: 611386564005855242
remember I can't talk
@Flat Earth Subgenius he's gonna txt
LT_Lauren#5122 LANGUAGE!!!
LT_Lauren#5122 LANGUAGE!!!
AHHHHHHH
@Flat Earth Subgenius nice name calling
He lives in a house
I'm assuming
yes?
i'm waiting for him
Make a point
do you want the equation or the derivation
do you want a website or do you just want me to paste it
Think he wants an explanation from you
alright
With a source to back it up
lets begin
I have not seen it with my own eyes, and here is the reason: You should be able to detect it from an aeroplane at a cruising height of around 10,600 metres (35,000 feet), but you need a fairly wide field of view (ie 60 degrees) and a virtually cloud-free horizon.
I did not have a wide enough field of view
the plane window is rather small and restricts the field of view
what people usually mean by this is actually a misnomer, they are actually seeing their horizon curve around them and not the curvature of the Earth
What you see when you look at a sphere is a fraction of that sphere proportional to your height above it (h) and the radius of that sphere (R), the proportion you can see is given by (h/2/(h+R)). This boundry forms a circle which we call the horizon.
```HYMN TO "R"
Our Eratosthenes whose sticks measured the heavens,
Hallowed be thy name,
Thy circumference come,
Thy radius be done,
On Earth as it measures in the heavens,
Give us this day our daily shadows,
And forgive us for assuming the distance to the sun,
To give us the globe.
R-men```
From just 200 meters elevation, on a 4000 pixel wide image at 94.4 degree field of view you should expect about 7 vertical pixels of rise out of the horizon circle
When providing evidence make sure you provide your own explaination and source to provide proof
EX: Water has three states solid liquid gas *paste source*
don't make hasty generalizations
They think they do because the window is fish eye lensed
That's like saying Satan isn't bad because other satanist say otherwise
In this form of faulty reasoning one's belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn't apply to a supposedly 'true' example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one's argument.
You can't use someone else's claims to justify
keep this pyramid in mind
name calling isnt valid
sound something like "cause you're a child"