Is perspective taken into account? I have a photo of the sun behind my thumb (does this prove the sun is smaller than my thumb or perspective really does matter?), please dont tell me that you have not allowed for the ship getting smaller as it moves away with in your calculations with the chop and wave height remaining constant at the horizon line as the boat gets smaller due to perspective.Where is p shown in your calculations?
Mathias - destroyer of ships! An old-style FE video would have focussed on the tiny fishing boat at 01:16 (preferably on a misty day) and said 'Look, it disappeared! Now let's zoom in and see if - oh WOW! - it just came back into view! No horizon.' Well done, Mathias. Quietly dismantling the 'FE wall of proof' brick by brick.
@@MathiasKp zooming only brings things back into View if the angular size was too small for the eye and it was still within the angle of view in front of the horizon. If something has passed the horizon line you will not bring the bottom back into view unless you elevate the camera to enlarge your field of view. It has absolutely nothing to do with curvature but it's just that your viewing angle was too narrow because the elevation was too low
@@garywybenga4188 You do talk a load of old tosh Gary. No one believes your tales lad, give up, it's clear you don't understand optics, or anything else. You going on about it ad nauseam just makes you look like an idiot.
@@DickHolman no I actually understand them I play with my camera at the time just to learn how to understand how it works. I am absolutely right and you guys are absolutely wrong
@@garywybenga4188 if there is a direct line of sight between you and 300 foot building then you should never see obstruction on a clear day but you do. What's the explanation for that?
Thanks, my videos are a bit boring, just information, most people prefere all the drama in discussion between FE vs GE. Anyway checkout this photo flic.kr/p/2icBrNd so far my favorite, since both drop and obstruction are shown at the same time.
@@zatekusen I tried to engage with some flat earthers, but they are not very keen on discussion my observations. Like this other observation ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd4/v-deo.html where 21.3m is missing of a building called Turning Torso.
Bester Beweis der Erdkrümmung 0:12 Hier sieht man es noch gut oder fast vollständig 2:55 Und so verschwindet das Schiff langsam hinter der Erdkrümmung 16:56 . Und hier kann man schon zuschauen, wie es langsam hinter der Erdkrümmung verschwindet 17:45 Best proof of the curvature of the earth 0:12 Here you can still see it well or almost completely 2:55 And so the ship slowly disappears behind the curvature of the earth 16:56 . And here you can already watch how it slowly disappears behind the curvature of the earth 17:45
Thanks, the view wasn't just as clear like this other day flic.kr/p/2iW7LPE but still clear enough to see that the bottom of the ferry disappear little by little.
So this video is better. The is a small amount of refraction and the effect is magnifying the ocean in front. What you need to do is get the ship tracker app so you can show how far away the boats are that you film. Otherwise how can we determine exactly what we are seeing. I do see this same effect off of Henley beach with cargo ships, but when I punch the numbers in they never match anywhere near what the globe says. So clearly a atmos effect.
If you want observations with those kind of details, take a look at these videos where I observe a very tall building: ua-cam.com/video/MoK2BKj7QYk/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/AN22ScCILZI/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/FPo77ukuHF8/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/TX7Obu1k-Cg/v-deo.html
@@MathiasKp Do you live in that area? If yes, get the marine radar app, I just checked and the ferry is on there, start filming when it leave take a screenshot of the app. Keep filming until it disappears take a screenshot of the app to get the exact distance, also take screenshots of the timestamp of the distance screenshot. I have footage of the Ciara Enterprise which was 17.6kms (11 miles) away, it was there for 14 days. I got footage everyday from the jetty at grange beach South Australia, 20 foot observer height. The globe mathew says 20 feet should have been hidden, yet on 2 days the was 0 feet hidden (granted refraction was high those days), but one of those days the camera was 6 inches off the water and the horizon was behind the ship. And the horizon line covered different heights of the ship on different days, from 0 feet all the way to approx 120 feet. The horizon can hide varying degrees on different days. You need to do multiple observations of the same thing.
@@planereality3675 On a different day (19th of March) I used an app to get the position of the ferry. I made a collage with all the needed data to calculate amount obstructed here flic.kr/p/2dVCxfR Ferry height estimated based on photographs: 24m Observer height: 4.05m Distance: 21.6km Amount hidden geometrical on globe Earth: 16.3m Amount hidden including std. refraction on globe Earth: 12.9m Amount hidden observed: ~13.3m
It's funny how the angular size decreases at a steady rate. You would think the boats disappearance would go much faster since it was not only decreasing an angular size but was also going over a supposed curve. But it didn't
And yet not all parts of the ship decrease equally. For some “unknown” reason, the bottom vanishes first. I wonder what it could be? Definitely not perspective because all parts ought to shrink symmetrically. If the top half go from 10px tall in frame to 6px, so would the bottom half and the overall object would’ve shrunk from 20px to 12px. Same with it’s width, we’d expect a similar proportional decrease. Instead, what we see is there’s minimal shrinkage due to perspective because the boat has only moved a slight portion of its total starting distance. We can confirm this by measuring how many pixels its width has decreased by the end right before its gone. But the amount of height that disappears is not equal to this, the entire ship is gone. Try again.
@@sphaera2520 the entire ship decreases in angular size at a steady rate and the viewing angle gets thinner as it moves away so the waves obstruct more and more of the bottom. No curvature involved whatsoever
Gary Wybenga Waves below than eye level can’t block distant objects taller than eye level. That implies things below eye level can appear above and vice versa. This is preposterous and silly to even entertain. Try again. A 100x100px square shrinking in the distance due to perspective will shrink *symmetrically*. If the height reduces by 50%, so does width. However what we see is width shrinks by like (idk) 5-10% and the height completely vanishes. What’s better is often times with bigger structures, you can still see some amount of detail that allows you to scale what’s missing. The Toronto needle blink gifs expose this beautifully. Try again. Or don’t, because it doesn’t and will never work. Earths not flat bub, try to keep up with the past 2000+ years.
Yup boat dissapears. Didn't really seem to get so tiny it dissapeared just gone. Just like the sun doesn't get smaller just dissapears. Awsome. Be funny if you could get a boat appearing and getting closer, would almost be like watcing a sun rise. From the top down to the bottom. No1 had to tell me that I see sunrise and sunsets in the same day travelling from east coast to west coast. I even have the privilege of starting from the centre.
Because you used Zoom it's hard to tell how far behind the Horizon line the ship and the sailboat are because the zoom squeezes everything behind the horizon forward to the Observer way more then it does in the near half of your field of view
_" it's hard to tell how far behind the Horizon line the ship and the sailboat are"_ This other day I tacked the ferry using an app, you can see some details on this image flic.kr/p/2dVCxfR
Flat earthers will say, "The reason you can't see the bottom of the ship is because your camera is too low of an elevation." HAHAHA !!! No crap. That's the whole point. The curve is in the way and you would have to increase the elevation of the camera to see the bottom of the ship. They don't even realize it but they're admitting there is a curve of water blocking the camera's view of the bottom of the ship. That's why you can't debate these people. They obviously have a problem for real. No, really. They have a problem.
@@ItsMeScareCro Elevation of the camera determines the perspective. Nice try but not really. You can watch the sunset on ground level and then go to the top of a really tall building and watch the sunset again. Basic geometry. You can do the same thing at an airport.
19:09 you can see a white cap coming across that's going to 'obscure' boat for a second LOL that's what you call noise and clutter (waves and swells) These are things that obscure the bottoms as ships sail away and Shrink or diminish or compress in angular size. You can see this as you watch the little waves blocking the Boat then you can see the boat and it blocks the boat again LOL
_"you can see a white cap coming across that's going to 'obscure' boat "_ I also did another observation using a telescope for better resolution ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd4/v-deo.html do you also think it is waves that obscures the bottom of the building in that video?
@@garywybenga4188 Thanks for taking the time to actual look at my two observations. For the most part the FE/GE discussion just turns into a people screaming at each other, so it's nice you wanted to look at observations and give feedback. But of course I disagree with you in the conclusion, that it is waves/swells on a flat Earth that hides the bottom since my observer height was well above the height for the waves/swells.
@Feeds Ravens Thanks for the info. Even though the FE/GE discussion can be frustating, I think it is a step forward that most flat earthers today accept that we see obstruction. I remember back in 2015 when flat earthers for the most part just denied there was any obstruction at all or that it was CGI/faked. So even though it is going slowly I do think we see progress.
Gary, 19:09 you only see white cap obscuring the very top of the boat which is barely visible any more. This is not some 10 meter high wave there. And why do you ignore the entire video which shows the ship gradually disappearing and there are no waves that go gradually bigger and bigger and bigger. Same thing with video with building. how can you say that 20 meters of building is obstructed by waves when there are no other but very small waves there.
1:12 notice the size of the swells with the little boat. Those waves in combination with the big ship compressing in size as it gets further away will absolutely obscure the bottom of the boat more and more as the ship moves away and also angular resolution which is why if you would have raised an elevation at that same place your hump would disappear because it really wasn't a hump. You have to know by now that a change in elevation reveals that there was no curve
All I notice is that you are spewing brainless idiocy with nothing to back it up. No real evidence other than that it is going over the horizon, the curve of the earth.
You really are the most ignorant delusional prick IF SOMETHING COMES BACK INTO VIEW WITH AN INCREASE IN ELEVATION it means ? mong head ? it is behind something
@primonomeultimonome Unfortunately for you, it shows exactly what would happen on a flat surface. Elevation increases the angle over the surface, which lets you see more detail for further out. This is simple every day ordinary perspective
@@MathiasKp if you observe the waves very carefully you will notice in the part closest to the horizon of the mirror and symmetrical structures, in the middle there should be the mirror line but it is difficult to identify in this case. However this is a very common case of fata morgana with sea refraction and compression and disappearance of distant targets because the images do not have a good definition
@@MathiasKp for example here you can see a ship that disappears but does not tilt as it should if it was following a curvature of a sphere. ua-cam.com/video/3_TpeNZYTmw/v-deo.html If you had observed it a day earlier with different temperatures and pressures you would have had different results.
Gary, please find a flat surface, verify that it is flat and demonstrate it. Objects do not lose their bottom with distance on flat surface but on curved surface. That is very easily demonstrable. Any claim that they lose their bottom because of something else is unfounded and no one has never provided any demonstration and mechanism other than curved surface.
@If you laugh you sub! -"If they are eye level to the level someone walks away on " - do you mean by that the situation for example where you have a table and put your camera at the edge of the table so it is kind of half above and below the table surface? Even then when surface is actually flat and level and camera is also level then the bottom of the object does not get obstructed by surface itself.
@@garywybenga4188 , little boat is little and you see clearly how waves behave. It bobs up and down and there is sometimes more visible and sometimes less. Where is surch behavior seen with the large boat? Nowhere. Where are 10 meters large waves? Nowhere. Instead of putting all kind of red herrrings out, diverting topic and so on, please, find a flat surface, verify that it is flat and demonstrate how objects lose bottoms on verified nad measured flat surface. You have not done that.
@@sasilik exactly the same thing happens on the larger boat with distance. it's angular size get smaller and the boats obscure more of it due to the angle of view. Thanks for confirming everything I've been saying
If the height of the waves is less than the observer height then the waves cannot obstruct more than their own height. Anyway here is another video of a Turning Torso filmed on a calm day ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd/v-deo.html the bottom 21.3m is behind the horizon perfect match for the globe Earth. Why can't we see the bottom? flic.kr/p/2g7dsKX
@@gowdsake7103 how big is the swell? oooooops, you don't know, nor do i. so we can't use it as evidence either way, all we can do is recognise that there is swell and discard the footage as evidence for ball or plane. come back on a day of dead calm and high clarity, instead of a day of mist and sea motion. of course we also have to accept that someone elses footage is second hand information and cannot be empirical evidence anyway, except as evidence of the leanings of the one who presented it as evidence.
@@evolutionCEO And thus you have your denial. Not accepting ANYONE else's observations is both ignorant and delusional. YOU have never been to see have you ? You have no clue about radar have you ? I can tell you for sure that is as near flat calm as you will mostly get and for sure less than 10 feet and let the footage shows a ship and its hull sinking lower and lower more and more of the bottom of the hull disappearing and the only bullshit you come up is we dont know how big the waves are
@@gowdsake7103 standard commercial radar has a flat and level floor, 100ft above sea level for 350 miles, unless there are obstacles in the way.. some special setups for 500 miles and more. i have seen low laying islands at over 70 miles away with my eyes. empirical evidence is a personal establishment of foundation, with fixed rules. the question for you is, do you want to know the truth, or do you want your beliefs upheld? sounds to me you are looking to have your beliefs upheld. if you were on a ball of the prescribed dimensions, at 200 miles, the radar floor would be 26,000 feet above sea level, when the radar station is just above sea level.
You just watched that ship sink and you didnt report it to the authorities? You curved earthers are absolute heathens!
Is perspective taken into account? I have a photo of the sun behind my thumb (does this prove the sun is smaller than my thumb or perspective really does matter?), please dont tell me that you have not allowed for the ship getting smaller as it moves away with in your calculations with the chop and wave height remaining constant at the horizon line as the boat gets smaller due to perspective.Where is p shown in your calculations?
You fucking tosspot ! fleurspective is an illusion
Mathias - destroyer of ships!
An old-style FE video would have focussed on the tiny fishing boat at 01:16 (preferably on a misty day) and said 'Look, it disappeared! Now let's zoom in and see if - oh WOW! - it just came back into view! No horizon.'
Well done, Mathias. Quietly dismantling the 'FE wall of proof' brick by brick.
Yes the good all _"you just need to zoom more"_ I still get flat earthers claiming that is the reason for obstruction.
@@MathiasKp zooming only brings things back into View if the angular size was too small for the eye and it was still within the angle of view in front of the horizon. If something has passed the horizon line you will not bring the bottom back into view unless you elevate the camera to enlarge your field of view. It has absolutely nothing to do with curvature but it's just that your viewing angle was too narrow because the elevation was too low
@@garywybenga4188
You do talk a load of old tosh Gary.
No one believes your tales lad, give up, it's clear you don't understand optics, or anything else.
You going on about it ad nauseam just makes you look like an idiot.
@@DickHolman no I actually understand them I play with my camera at the time just to learn how to understand how it works.
I am absolutely right and you guys are absolutely wrong
@@garywybenga4188 if there is a direct line of sight between you and 300 foot building then you should never see obstruction on a clear day but you do. What's the explanation for that?
This channel is so underrated, this must be on the daily UA-cam recommendation just to let everyone remember stuff.
Thanks, my videos are a bit boring, just information, most people prefere all the drama in discussion between FE vs GE. Anyway checkout this photo flic.kr/p/2icBrNd so far my favorite, since both drop and obstruction are shown at the same time.
@@MathiasKp It's sad that all the popular "discussion" between the FE and GE I found on youtube is not discussing any hard, cold evidence like this.
@@zatekusen I tried to engage with some flat earthers, but they are not very keen on discussion my observations. Like this other observation ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd4/v-deo.html where 21.3m is missing of a building called Turning Torso.
Bester Beweis der Erdkrümmung 0:12 Hier sieht man es noch gut oder fast vollständig 2:55 Und so verschwindet das Schiff langsam hinter der Erdkrümmung 16:56
. Und hier kann man schon zuschauen, wie es langsam hinter der Erdkrümmung verschwindet 17:45
Best proof of the curvature of the earth 0:12 Here you can still see it well or almost completely 2:55 And so the ship slowly disappears behind the curvature of the earth 16:56
. And here you can already watch how it slowly disappears behind the curvature of the earth 17:45
Ein Super Doku 👍😃
A great documentary 👍😃
Very nice Mathias
Thanks, the view wasn't just as clear like this other day flic.kr/p/2iW7LPE but still clear enough to see that the bottom of the ferry disappear little by little.
So this video is better.
The is a small amount of refraction and the effect is magnifying the ocean in front.
What you need to do is get the ship tracker app so you can show how far away the boats are that you film.
Otherwise how can we determine exactly what we are seeing.
I do see this same effect off of Henley beach with cargo ships, but when I punch the numbers in they never match anywhere near what the globe says.
So clearly a atmos effect.
If you want observations with those kind of details, take a look at these videos where I observe a very tall building:
ua-cam.com/video/MoK2BKj7QYk/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/AN22ScCILZI/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/FPo77ukuHF8/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/TX7Obu1k-Cg/v-deo.html
@@MathiasKp
Do you live in that area?
If yes, get the marine radar app, I just checked and the ferry is on there, start filming when it leave take a screenshot of the app.
Keep filming until it disappears take a screenshot of the app to get the exact distance, also take screenshots of the timestamp of the distance screenshot.
I have footage of the Ciara Enterprise which was 17.6kms (11 miles) away, it was there for 14 days.
I got footage everyday from the jetty at grange beach South Australia, 20 foot observer height.
The globe mathew says 20 feet should have been hidden, yet on 2 days the was 0 feet hidden (granted refraction was high those days), but one of those days the camera was 6 inches off the water and the horizon was behind the ship.
And the horizon line covered different heights of the ship on different days, from 0 feet all the way to approx 120 feet. The horizon can hide varying degrees on different days.
You need to do multiple observations of the same thing.
@@planereality3675 On a different day (19th of March) I used an app to get the position of the ferry. I made a collage with all the needed data to calculate amount obstructed here flic.kr/p/2dVCxfR
Ferry height estimated based on photographs: 24m
Observer height: 4.05m
Distance: 21.6km
Amount hidden geometrical on globe Earth: 16.3m
Amount hidden including std. refraction on globe Earth: 12.9m
Amount hidden observed: ~13.3m
@@planereality3675 ua-cam.com/video/CkWaQrtGcjk/v-deo.html
@@MathiasKp
Yeah I saw the collage, very confusing.
Just write it and show the photos.
Too many boats, which one to watch.
It's funny how the angular size decreases at a steady rate.
You would think the boats disappearance would go much faster since it was not only decreasing an angular size but was also going over a supposed curve.
But it didn't
And yet not all parts of the ship decrease equally. For some “unknown” reason, the bottom vanishes first. I wonder what it could be?
Definitely not perspective because all parts ought to shrink symmetrically. If the top half go from 10px tall in frame to 6px, so would the bottom half and the overall object would’ve shrunk from 20px to 12px. Same with it’s width, we’d expect a similar proportional decrease.
Instead, what we see is there’s minimal shrinkage due to perspective because the boat has only moved a slight portion of its total starting distance. We can confirm this by measuring how many pixels its width has decreased by the end right before its gone. But the amount of height that disappears is not equal to this, the entire ship is gone.
Try again.
@@sphaera2520 the entire ship decreases in angular size at a steady rate and the viewing angle gets thinner as it moves away so the waves obstruct more and more of the bottom.
No curvature involved whatsoever
@@garywybenga4188 Must've been rough out there in the 15 meter swells... but strange how the ship doesn't seem to be bobbing up and down.
Gary Wybenga
Waves below than eye level can’t block distant objects taller than eye level. That implies things below eye level can appear above and vice versa. This is preposterous and silly to even entertain. Try again.
A 100x100px square shrinking in the distance due to perspective will shrink *symmetrically*. If the height reduces by 50%, so does width. However what we see is width shrinks by like (idk) 5-10% and the height completely vanishes. What’s better is often times with bigger structures, you can still see some amount of detail that allows you to scale what’s missing. The Toronto needle blink gifs expose this beautifully. Try again. Or don’t, because it doesn’t and will never work. Earths not flat bub, try to keep up with the past 2000+ years.
Yup boat dissapears. Didn't really seem to get so tiny it dissapeared just gone. Just like the sun doesn't get smaller just dissapears. Awsome. Be funny if you could get a boat appearing and getting closer, would almost be like watcing a sun rise. From the top down to the bottom. No1 had to tell me that I see sunrise and sunsets in the same day travelling from east coast to west coast. I even have the privilege of starting from the centre.
Excellent video mate! Flurfers got nothing.
Thanks
It's exactly what you would see on a flat surface
@@garywybenga4188 - if you were on LSD Gary...
@@gdog1373 straight as an arrow.
You have no idea what you're looking at
@@garywybenga4188 - I can assure you I do Gary. Would you care to explain why objects vanish from the bottom first in example videos like this?
Because you used Zoom it's hard to tell how far behind the Horizon line the ship and the sailboat are because the zoom squeezes everything behind the horizon forward to the Observer way more then it does in the near half of your field of view
_" it's hard to tell how far behind the Horizon line the ship and the sailboat are"_ This other day I tacked the ferry using an app, you can see some details on this image flic.kr/p/2dVCxfR
Do explain that you moron !
Fuck me its sinking
Normal people post vids like this when there's little distortion. Flattardians wait for the worst days to make observations. Well done sure! 👏👏
@Kellybean 1 And you believe in nonsense way to go
Flat earthers will say, "The reason you can't see the bottom of the ship is because your camera is too low of an elevation."
HAHAHA !!! No crap. That's the whole point. The curve is in the way and you would have to increase the elevation of the camera to see the bottom of the ship. They don't even realize it but they're admitting there is a curve of water blocking the camera's view of the bottom of the ship. That's why you can't debate these people. They obviously have a problem for real. No, really. They have a problem.
You spelled: "I have no fucking idea how perspective works" wrong.
@@ItsMeScareCro Elevation of the camera determines the perspective. Nice try but not really. You can watch the sunset on ground level and then go to the top of a really tall building and watch the sunset again. Basic geometry. You can do the same thing at an airport.
@@buriedinsanity9812 - *laughs in "black swan"... figure it out.
@@ItsMeScareCro OK...
@@ItsMeScareCroThe black swan is over. The blegg swan destroyed it.
19:09 you can see a white cap coming across that's going to 'obscure' boat for a second LOL that's what you call noise and clutter (waves and swells)
These are things that obscure the bottoms as ships sail away and Shrink or diminish or compress in angular size.
You can see this as you watch the little waves blocking the Boat then you can see the boat and it blocks the boat again LOL
_"you can see a white cap coming across that's going to 'obscure' boat "_ I also did another observation using a telescope for better resolution ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd4/v-deo.html do you also think it is waves that obscures the bottom of the building in that video?
@@MathiasKp absolutely it is
@@garywybenga4188 Thanks for taking the time to actual look at my two observations. For the most part the FE/GE discussion just turns into a people screaming at each other, so it's nice you wanted to look at observations and give feedback.
But of course I disagree with you in the conclusion, that it is waves/swells on a flat Earth that hides the bottom since my observer height was well above the height for the waves/swells.
@Feeds Ravens Thanks for the info. Even though the FE/GE discussion can be frustating, I think it is a step forward that most flat earthers today accept that we see obstruction. I remember back in 2015 when flat earthers for the most part just denied there was any obstruction at all or that it was CGI/faked. So even though it is going slowly I do think we see progress.
Gary, 19:09 you only see white cap obscuring the very top of the boat which is barely visible any more. This is not some 10 meter high wave there. And why do you ignore the entire video which shows the ship gradually disappearing and there are no waves that go gradually bigger and bigger and bigger. Same thing with video with building. how can you say that 20 meters of building is obstructed by waves when there are no other but very small waves there.
1:12 notice the size of the swells with the little boat. Those waves in combination with the big ship compressing in size as it gets further away will absolutely obscure the bottom of the boat more and more as the ship moves away and also angular resolution which is why if you would have raised an elevation at that same place your hump would disappear because it really wasn't a hump. You have to know by now that a change in elevation reveals that there was no curve
All I notice is that you are spewing brainless idiocy with nothing to back it up. No real evidence other than that it is going over the horizon, the curve of the earth.
You really are the most ignorant delusional prick
IF SOMETHING COMES BACK INTO VIEW WITH AN INCREASE IN ELEVATION it means ? mong head ? it is behind something
Too bad that a change in elevation shows exactly what expected over a curved surface. Welcome to the globe Gary.
@primonomeultimonome Unfortunately for you, it shows exactly what would happen on a flat surface. Elevation increases the angle over the surface, which lets you see more detail for further out.
This is simple every day ordinary perspective
@@garywybenga4188 Nothing disappears over a flat surface unless it gets hidden by something above the surface. Goodbye imaginary pancake.
Inferior mirage
Nope. Unless inferior mirages now are invisible flic.kr/p/2fP5whP
@@MathiasKp yes, an other inferior mirage! You can see the mirror line which raises the sea horizon causing an optical wall
@@TERRAPIATTACHANNELGC Where is this mirror line in this other video ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd4/v-deo.html
@@MathiasKp if you observe the waves very carefully you will notice in the part closest to the horizon of the mirror and symmetrical structures, in the middle there should be the mirror line but it is difficult to identify in this case. However this is a very common case of fata morgana with sea refraction and compression and disappearance of distant targets because the images do not have a good definition
@@MathiasKp for example here you can see a ship that disappears but does not tilt as it should if it was following a curvature of a sphere. ua-cam.com/video/3_TpeNZYTmw/v-deo.html
If you had observed it a day earlier with different temperatures and pressures you would have had different results.
This is exactly what I would expect to see on a flat surface
Gary, please find a flat surface, verify that it is flat and demonstrate it. Objects do not lose their bottom with distance on flat surface but on curved surface. That is very easily demonstrable. Any claim that they lose their bottom because of something else is unfounded and no one has never provided any demonstration and mechanism other than curved surface.
@If you laugh you sub! -"If they are eye level to the level someone walks away on " - do you mean by that the situation for example where you have a table and put your camera at the edge of the table so it is kind of half above and below the table surface? Even then when surface is actually flat and level and camera is also level then the bottom of the object does not get obstructed by surface itself.
@@sasilik :30 can you see the black line at the bottom of the little boat at this point and if not why not LOL
@@garywybenga4188 , little boat is little and you see clearly how waves behave. It bobs up and down and there is sometimes more visible and sometimes less. Where is surch behavior seen with the large boat? Nowhere. Where are 10 meters large waves? Nowhere. Instead of putting all kind of red herrrings out, diverting topic and so on, please, find a flat surface, verify that it is flat and demonstrate how objects lose bottoms on verified nad measured flat surface. You have not done that.
@@sasilik exactly the same thing happens on the larger boat with distance.
it's angular size get smaller and the boats obscure more of it due to the angle of view.
Thanks for confirming everything I've been saying
Choppy seas.... Why are balling ballers always showing boats in choppy seas??? No good for horizon tests.
If the height of the waves is less than the observer height then the waves cannot obstruct more than their own height. Anyway here is another video of a Turning Torso filmed on a calm day ua-cam.com/video/5ibkXsQoWd/v-deo.html the bottom 21.3m is behind the horizon perfect match for the globe Earth.
Why can't we see the bottom? flic.kr/p/2g7dsKX
It makes zero difference fu++wit
The SHIP is massively bigger than the small swell
@@gowdsake7103 how big is the swell? oooooops, you don't know, nor do i. so we can't use it as evidence either way, all we can do is recognise that there is swell and discard the footage as evidence for ball or plane. come back on a day of dead calm and high clarity, instead of a day of mist and sea motion.
of course we also have to accept that someone elses footage is second hand information and cannot be empirical evidence anyway, except as evidence of the leanings of the one who presented it as evidence.
@@evolutionCEO And thus you have your denial. Not accepting ANYONE else's observations is both ignorant and delusional. YOU have never been to see have you ? You have no clue about radar have you ? I can tell you for sure that is as near flat calm as you will mostly get and for sure less than 10 feet
and let the footage shows a ship and its hull sinking lower and lower more and more of the bottom of the hull disappearing and the only bullshit you come up is we dont know how big the waves are
@@gowdsake7103 standard commercial radar has a flat and level floor, 100ft above sea level for 350 miles, unless there are obstacles in the way.. some special setups for 500 miles and more. i have seen low laying islands at over 70 miles away with my eyes.
empirical evidence is a personal establishment of foundation, with fixed rules.
the question for you is, do you want to know the truth, or do you want your beliefs upheld? sounds to me you are looking to have your beliefs upheld.
if you were on a ball of the prescribed dimensions, at 200 miles, the radar floor would be 26,000 feet above sea level, when the radar station is just above sea level.