Are "flat-earthers" an actual thing?

Bugs Bunny proved Earth to be round:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgqW_hgpuEI

Wait wait wait. You want to show me computer animated videos to illustrate how wrong I am? Let's just take a moment to basque in the irony. I guess we can always hope. Some issues with the "video": - We have to take his word he correctly used "NASA's" numbers, and that the rendering was accurately implemented without distortion. He didn't show us much detail about the math behind the GE rendering. - Much of it was "at night" where we see black on black -- missing most of the ascent. WTH? - There is no "camera", and nothing to focus -- what the heck does 36mm focal length even mean? What would be the source of any "barrel distortion", if there is no real lens and no image sensors? Are there other kinds of distortions not eliminated? - We can clearly see the x-y aspect ratio was not preserved -- he squished the two images to fit them side by side -- presumably because he was only interested in showing the horizon. But it exagerates the left to right curvature. This is obvious by observing the shape of the sun. (We can also ask, which sun is closer to the reality?) - What are the photographic details of the "reality" image? How high up is the camera? What is the horizontal and vertical FOV? What was the camera pitch? What kind of camera and lens? Is there barrel distortion? Where does the line in the middle belong, representing 0 deg pitch from the camera? How did he decide to line up the picture with the computer graphic images? Even then, the "FE" scenario gives a horizon that is too high, compared to the "reality". What is the consensus explanation for the lack of visibility beyond a few hundred kms? (In another video, going up to 154 miles, we should see the edge of the earth. Yet from Space Station images at 250 miles, we still have a quite limited view of the earth). What about the EARTH itself in the reality image? Look at the landmarks. How far away is the horizon from the camera? How much of the earth are we seeing? A flat earth predicts we should see much more of the earth than we do see in the "reality" photos. Did you do the math yourself? When will you do the mountain experiment that Islamic astronomers did more than 1000 years ago, long before Copernicus and NASA. Do the math. At what angle do you predict to have to point a telescope to see the horizon? Or what angle do you point a camera in a balloon to see the horizon? (Note when you do the math. I left an Easter Egg for you in my last message -- there is a slight, but not fatal, mistake in my calculations of the "circular track" analogy -- let's see if you, or any flat-earther, possess the math skills to find and correct it.)

Are all the planets flat? What about the Sun?

A better question might be why people want the Earth to be flat. How will that actually make their lives different?

Ground Control to Major Tom wrote:

what the heck does 36mm focal length even mean? What would be the source of any "barrel distortion", if there is no real lens and no image sensors?

I'm a photographer. To clarify, there are no lenses with 36mm focal length that I know of. There are however, 35mm. This is the standard length that is considered closest to what the eye normally sees. In other words, it is the medium point between a zoom and a wide angle lens.

Secondly, barrel distortion is what is found on most wide angle lenses. Think of it as the middle of the photo having an effect like it is being pushed out from behind, causing distortion. It is the opposite of pincushion distortion (found on zoom lenses).

A 35mm lens would generally have no distortion, as it is a very simple prime lens in which nothing needs to be done to add zoom or wide-angle-ness.

Thirdly, stop feeding the troll. He is an idiot, as you are well aware. Nothing you say will not be provided with endless bogus answers. It is a never-ending argument in which he just feeds back garbage that he passes off as "proof." You will never get anywhere. That's the point of the troll, as well explained by the "will repeat until thread dies" guy.

Flathead Indian wrote:

Are all the planets flat? What about the Sun?

A better question might be why people want the Earth to be flat. How will that actually make their lives different?

Stop feeding the troll.

just stop wrote:

Flathead Indian wrote:

Are all the planets flat? What about the Sun?

A better question might be why people want the Earth to be flat. How will that actually make their lives different?

Stop feeding the troll.

I really just wanted to know if they had a reason.

... who keep responding to the thread, thinking they will eventually "stump" the troll. The whole point of the troll is a circular argument that never ends. They have a bogus answer for everything, and the people being trolled keep thinking they will find that *one* thing that will stump them. But it doesn't happen. And the troll continues. Because people aren't very smart at seeing through it.

so they can troll people wrote:

... who keep responding to the thread, thinking they will eventually "stump" the troll. The whole point of the troll is a circular argument that never ends. They have a bogus answer for everything, and the people being trolled keep thinking they will find that *one* thing that will stump them. But it doesn't happen. And the troll continues. Because people aren't very smart at seeing through it.

I wasn't trying to do that or even address the troll. Just wondering if anyone knew why.

If someone convinced me the Earth was flat what exactly am I likely to do differently?

I am not a pilot.

So now you are going to argue with the Maths of AutoCAD. This is the problem with your dogmatic stance.

Once upon a time the scientific community laughed at the Wright brothers. It's ok to go against consensus and science should embrace the challenge. All I see is ridicule and name calling.

so they can troll people wrote:

... who keep responding to the thread, thinking they will eventually "stump" the troll. The whole point of the troll is a circular argument that never ends. They have a bogus answer for everything, and the people being trolled keep thinking they will find that *one* thing that will stump them. But it doesn't happen. And the troll continues. Because people aren't very smart at seeing through it.

I love the fact that you keep telling me what I believe and who I trust (not NASA). Why does it bother you so much, could it be that deep down you can also see the flaws in the globe model?

Here's what you people are doing by replying to this thread:

1. Flat Earth Troll trolls for people that will argue with him, thinking he is serious about the Earth being flat (he is good, and a lot of you are stupid, so you WILL go to great lengths to "prove" Earth is round to him).

2. Flat Earth Troll delights in their efforts and discounts it with on-the-ready cut-and paste text, videos, diagrams, etc. refuting their claim. This troll works particularly well because there is lots of ready-made material like this to aid in the troll.

3. This enrages/frustrates easily-trolled people (which is the goal of trolling). They argue with Flat Earth Troll. He insists he is "not a troll, you people are sheep who believe what the government tells you, and here's some proof Earth is flat." Easily-trolled people scour the internet for counter-proof that the Earth is round (which Flat Earth Troll knows, but that is beside the point). This is exactly what Flat Earth Troll wants you to do. He knows the Earth is round. You are being stupid.(repeat step 2).

4. Although some understand it as a troll, many do not and can't resist, as he seems to be good at the troll, coupled with the fact that many people are apparently stupid and don't see it as what it is: a never ending, never resolved argument that is the very essence of a troll.

5. Thread disappears for a few months. Flat Earth Troll resurrects it, often by pretending to be someone who wants to argue with Flat Earth Troll. (repeat step 1).

Addendum: Although I have pointed out what this thread is all about in plain English, Flat Earth Troll will still, incredibly, be able to bury the post and continue making stupid people engage in the never-ending argument (see above posts).

The Flat Earth people should organize a voyage to crumbly bottom side of this giant divot and figure out a way to get some light there. It would have to be cheaper than a mission to Mars.

Weather balloons reach 141,000ft that show no curvature without a fish eye lens. At that height you should be able to see 922 miles of the Earth as a maximum. That is 11.6 % of the Earths diameter. Therefore the shots should show curvature that reflect that ratio, but they clearly do not.

Just look at this picture. Do you really trust that the Sun is 93 million miles away?

https://archive.org/details/142.5HourPeakAltitude

Just one non CGI photo or video of the Earth would make this whole movement go away, just one.

Here's what you people are doing by replying to this thread:

1. Flat Earth Troll trolls for people that will argue with him, thinking he is serious about the Earth being flat (he is good, and a lot of you are stupid, so you WILL go to great lengths to "prove" Earth is round to him).

2. Flat Earth Troll delights in their efforts and discounts it with on-the-ready cut-and paste text, videos, diagrams, etc. refuting their claim. This troll works particularly well because there is lots of ready-made material like this to aid in the troll.

3. This enrages/frustrates easily-trolled people (which is the goal of trolling). They argue with Flat Earth Troll. He insists he is "not a troll, you people are sheep who believe what the government tells you, and here's some proof Earth is flat." Easily-trolled people scour the internet for counter-proof that the Earth is round (which Flat Earth Troll knows, but that is beside the point). This is exactly what Flat Earth Troll wants you to do. He knows the Earth is round. You are being stupid.(repeat step 2).

4. Although some understand it as a troll, many do not and can't resist, as he seems to be good at the troll, coupled with the fact that many people are apparently stupid and don't see it as what it is: a never ending, never resolved argument that is the very essence of a troll.

5. Thread disappears for a few months. Flat Earth Troll resurrects it, often by pretending to be someone who wants to argue with Flat Earth Troll. (repeat step 1).

Addendum: Although I have pointed out what this thread is all about in plain English, Flat Earth Troll will still, incredibly, be able to bury the post and continue making stupid people engage in the never-ending argument (see above posts).

Rayo. wrote:

Weather balloons reach 141,000ft that show no curvature without a fish eye lens. At that height you should be able to see 922 miles of the Earth as a maximum. That is 11.6 % of the Earths diameter. Therefore the shots should show curvature that reflect that ratio, but they clearly do not.

You would have to personally be on the balloon and bring a fish with you to establish that.

I wasn't really asking for an explanation of camera lenses, focal lengths, or barrel distortions, but rather asking what these things have to do with a computer generated animation where there is no camera. It's not really a primary goal to stump the troll, but that would be a bonus.

"The Earth is bigger than what your eyes can see" but according to the accepted globalist 'maths' you will see curvature at 8" per mile squared. So which is it? You can't have it both ways. You're telling me it's a ball and has curvature but you can't see it because it's too large- this basically translates to you can't see curvature because of perspective? LMAO! You just disproved your own globe model by that statement alone.

Why don't you globeheads explain why all these (CGI) photos of Earth don't match up with Neal Degrasse Tyson's "oblate spheroid"? The only argument that you have is what you were taught in grade school.

Oh and Happy Thanksgiving.