puff puff give man

<:vWarning:390208158699618306> **Shekhar**#9279 is not in a voice channel!

@Deleted User I didn’t do anything. You buffoon. 🙄

!mute @Deleted User just clowning around 😃

someone is a bit to trigger happy

Roger

<@588220461385646112> dude you just go straight to running your mouth from one comment ?

do I know you?

omg discord is crap lately

a sword...

If Roman soldiers had guns, bringing a sword wouldn’t be applicable.

Rektum? you still in here?

Tiananmen Square is still empty

That one. ^

i can't see mount rainier from vancouver at ground level, but when i get on a plane and go up, i can see it on the horizon

When we elevate and look down, this walkway, and building can be seen as entirely flat. There’s a perspective ramp we see to a point that does block the bases of distant buildings.

cameras can make things look weird @the first image

If the curve existed in the first image, we would see it in the second.

the curve does exist in the first image

It’s like saying we can see curve on a basketball close up, but not when we elevate the camera off it.

if you go up high enough, you will see the curve

We do actually see the curve in the second imagine and we can tell it's not a fish eye

Oh really, April?

rockets don't go straight up for a reason, it's inefficient

Where?

basic optics

the effect on the first image is called fish eye, it creates a distorted view of the bridge

Near the horizon it's not too noticeable the curve is a small curve due to how big the earth is

The first image isn’t fisheye.

it looks flat in the second photo because you're above and the earth is kinda big relative to the bridge

it is though

It’s Soundly’s photograph.

If we can see curve at surface level, we absolutely would see it at higher elevation.

Period.