Видео

This was filmed with a Nikon P900 at max zoom.

Won't that take teleconverters? Double your range instantly. I used to use three of them. The power was unbelievable

@@ReddNashe I had enough difficulty keeping the boat in frame with just the built-in lens and the camera mounted on an ordinary tripod, so I wouldn't want more range. And there is no need for more magnification since the image is already large enough to clearly see the shape of the boat as it descends behind the water.

Also even if the creator were to zoom in, wouldn't the zoom out make the ship entirely disappear by your logic? No it makes it smaller but its still there!

@@GarbageGamer74 I find it hard to believe that you were at full zoom. You said only 12 miles away, the P900 should be able to have that in full frame at only 12 miles away. I one P900, and three P1000s. Anyway,, if you are actually looking for truth, you need to have something as. a marker that's around 4 miles away that is always there, like a buoy or known land mark. The you do that you will see that the position of the horizon is constantly changing, you will see days the horizon is closer and days the horizon is further away. I have land and houses at 12.6 miles away, and from the same observer height, I can have days where pop to 70' is hidden and days where 0' are hidden. It all depends on the distance to the horizon. The the horizon is in a refracted position that is close to you, objects at set distances can be completely hidden and the the horizon is further from you, those same objects can now be 100% seen. Whether the horizon is 4 miles away, 10 miles, 20 or 100 miles away, it always rises towards your eye level. The horizon is the furthest point that you can see the surface of either water or land. Once something reaches the horizon it will always start to disappear beyond that, but that is not due to curvature, i'ts due to the refracted position of the horizon due to the conditions of the day, air temperature, humidity, surface temperature being the main driving factors and then over water, swell can also have some effect. Im not appealing to my own authority but I have not come to this conclusion lightly. I have filmed big ships and land in my local area over 500 times, during over 360 days of filming (many days I have been out 2 or 3 times), and this has been over a period of 1.5 years, 300 of those days were last year, I had a few months off but have filmed more just over 60 times this year but am filming daily now again. I have footage from a 28' observer height all the way dow to 15cm camera height which I have filmed a rock shore break wall 14.3 miles away from a 15cm camera height. So as a flat earther who has done more filming than 99% of the rest of the world and for some reason being now one of only 2 people to figure out (the other is the plane truth with over 600 days of filming), that its the literal position of the horizon that is determining what and how we see distant objects. All of what I have posted so far is on X (twitter). If you are so interested this is where I presented just a small amount of my work toTravis formally known as the plane truth. x.com/reality_plane/status/1801419301339205940 If you ever want to chat and go through the evidence, look at raw files etc, I'm always available. I will also be putting this in a main comment on this video.

Lmfao

Nice buzzwords

Try doing some research.

@@liftingtheveil8361 try getting a brain

@@logic.and.reasoning Try making observations in the real world. By the way, I think you need to change your name.

Liar

Can you name this "Nobel" Prize winning physicist?

"Nobel" prize was established in 1901, which would make it only 123 years old.

@@vpheonix The discovery was made in 1896, he won the Noble Prize in 1904.

@@vpheonix Google the Rayleigh Criterion

@@RayleighCriterion Rayleigh never claimed that diffraction had anything to do with the horizon or ships dissapearing bottom up as they sailed away.

What do you mean? It clearly proves that the boat gradually disappeared over the horizon due to the curvature of the earth. The last thing you saw was the mast of the boat; if you could see that, then the boat was still visible, the exception being the part that was obstructed by the very earth itself.

@@jasonpoole2093 Hi, you have the choice to explain something you see with belief or with physics.. Objects that move away from us disappear due to the laws of perspective. Everyone can test this for themselves if you go to a lake one day where the water is completely still and you choose an object at a sufficient distance, then you will see that the object is through it Water is covered... (but not because the water bends) And about the ships on the horizon, you can often still see the water "behind" the ship... and that is physically illogical, because a ship cannot disappear behind a curved edge, and the water behind the ship remains visible behind the same curved edge.. 🧠🥃

​@@JHeinz-td4jdWhere do you see any water behind the ship? Dude seriously, just accept the obvious facts instead of try to explain yourself a fantasy realm!

@@JHeinz-td4jd The ship is clearly still big enough with the zooming, so it would be fully visible without curvature blocking parts of it. It barely changed in size, because it was far away in the first place, so that little difference in distance shouldn't matter, but it did. So it's not perspective.

​@@JHeinz-td4jdsmooth brain, you deny all know physics and science, and have zero clue of anything. All you did was parrot other morons.

Some people went to space, they took cameras with them. It's not flat.

@@A15degreeperhourdriftpeople can and do in fact lie or didn't you know this?

@@PeterPete Yes we know. In this instance, it's flat earthers like yourselves.

@@A15degreeperhourdrifti only give my opinion and so am not professing to be correct. I could be wrong. But from my experiences of the natural environment and people, to me the Earth is a level plane!

@@PeterPete We both know it isn't though, don't we? It's just that some people choose to deliberately misrepresent, and outright lie so morons will subscribe to their RUclips channels. If earth is as you claim, a level plane, you could complete a small challenge to prove it, are you ready to accept the terms of a challenge and prove your case?

You seem a little delusional. Perhaps you should alter your medication.

Are you a bit dumb?

If you zoom out, you wouldn't see anything. That's the point of the zoom, to see stuff in the distance.

Smooth brain

But the morror line is smaller than the whole boat. How can it hide behind it?

Stupidity at its best

it is zoomed in. Zooming is no magical thing that lets parts of the sipt appear that are hidden behind water. It just makes things visible that otherwise were too small to see .

@@melonenlord2723 you have no idea what I am talking about do you ? My suggestion - watch some more videos and do a little research before commenting.

@@punisher7772 Just zoom in onto sun after it disappears over horizon. You will never get it back into view with that. Only way is to increase viewer height.

@@melonenlord2723 first off what happened to the ship ? And you wanna start talking about the sun ? One thing at a time. Ships don't disappear over any curve and they are not hidden by water ! Why do you think I said to zoom in the first place ? People are just getting dumber by the day.

@@punisher7772 Its zoomed in, thats why you see the boat. Else you couldn't see it disappearing. People overall don't get dumber, only some.

Ha ha! Welcome to the world of precision measurements with amateur equipment. I went down the floating route too. The main problem I ran into there is that water has a surprising amount of viscosity and surface tension in comparison to the force we're trying to measure. (Hint: Make sure the water is clean. Viscosity builds quickly as it gets colonized by microorganisms.) The gyrocompass I built was an accidental discovery while tinkering with what was intended to eventually be a full float-based gyroscope. I agree it's a wonder Foucault did it. If he had a competent machinist (which I am not!) working with him, someone who could make a really good, properly balanced, bearing, I think it's possible. Also, my understanding is he used a significantly bigger flywheel, maybe 8cm diameter? More rotational inertia could be a major help.

As I understand it, the "FE model" is that the Earth is flat and that the stars are physical objects that exist above the plane of the Earth. Consequently, each star should be a fixed, consistent distance above the plane for all observers.

He also showed that it displaced to the bottom if the iron was in the top, so the iron was the cause, especially the heat.

Go to a Ship Model Basin and observe the curved water 💦

@@awatt 🤣

@@5mintalk Ship Model Basins prove the globe 🌍

@@awatt - "Ship Model Basins prove the globe" So do fiber-optic gyros. We use them tens of thousands of times a day to measure earth rotation worldwide.

@@stuartgray5877 Don't forget Compton Generators. They do a good job at proving the globe as well as gyrocompass finding north when switch on.

- "The part about the Earth allegedly spinning in circles, tho....Yeah that part is the Bullshit of the story." Except for the pesky FACT that we MEASURE EARTH ROTATION AND CURVATURE TENS of THOUSANDS of times a day worldwide. This IS a fact regardless of what you think

What is hilarious is you think you know what you're talking about but don't. It's still there, it didn't disappear over the horizon. It's out of view but if you were to zoom in it would reappear. It's really very simple.

​@@punisher7772 You are absolutely right. I once watched a ferry go over the horizon and disappearing completely. Several hours later it came back. The same I experienced with the sun setting. I zoomed in and in and in, and the next day in the morning it really came back, but from the opposite site. It's really very simple-minded.

@@shuabshungne8043 you think your being funny with your sarcasm but it just proves your ignorance. There is video to prove what I am talking about. It's amazing to me with all the information available nowadays you choose to ignore and deny the proof we don't live on a spinning water ball 🏀 But you go right ahead and believe the sun actually goes down below some imaginary curve. And you probably believe we can travel into space and landed on the moon too LOL

@@punisher7772 >>"with all the information available nowadays you choose to ignore ..."<< Wow, now that's amusing!

​@@punisher7772 >>"... with all the information available nowadays you choose to ignore and deny the proof ..."<< Wow, now that's amusing and ironic!

That’s not true. It’s consistent thousands of times a day every single day.

@@UpperDarbyDetailing you’re just making claims and screaming “nuh uh” when we’ve demonstrated this to you multiple times. Maybe for once, one of you dumbasses could try to prove the globe instead of appealing to explanations.

@@TruEarthTruMan - "they’ve had mixed results of “drift” dependent on elevation and other factors. As much as 7-8°. That is a flat out lie. I have been testing fiber-optic gyros since before you were born. They read 15.0 degree per hour rotation REGARDLESS of where on the earth they are. PERIOD. Now stop making stuff up.

You calling something a lie, when you weren’t there and YOU have NEVER done it, means nothing to me. Cope baaltard

@@TruEarthTruMan - "You calling something a lie, when you weren’t there and YOU have NEVER done it, means nothing to me." Sorry but I have been HANDS-ON testing fiber-optic gyros as an Aerospace Test Engineer since first trained to do so by Lockheed Martin in the 1990s. I have tested about four different kinds including a mechanical gyro and they ALL READ EARTH ROTATION. It is YOU that needs to "cope" with reality.

for stupid guys, " Black........."

Quoting wikipedia: "In an inferior mirage, the mirage image appears below the real object." I don't see any place where there are two images of the hull, nor anything else.

I replied. Is my comment blocked? I’m not able to link a site.

@@theplanetruth I just went through all the comments on all videos that were held for review and approved them all, but I didn't see any from you. I also changed the comment moderation setting from "hold inappropriate" to "allow all". I'm not sure what to suggest. I guess post it again?

No. That would not be possible

No one is immune to confirmation bias. If I have made a mistake, please be specific about what and when.

@@GarbageGamer74 fair enough. Are you FE Dogma?

@@GarbageGamer74 your bias shows the minute mark you mention the cause being earth’s curve. Is it possible the observation has another cause?

@@theplanetruth No. I don't know who that is.

@@theplanetruth At 0:16 I said this evidence is *consistent* with a round earth. That means a round earth is one possible explanation, but I did not rule out others. At 0:23 I said this is inconsistent with a flat earth, by which I mean the FE model as I understand it. You're welcome to suggest a hypothesis for why the water appears curved but is in fact flat.

Smoothbrain

Smooth brain

Because the angle is very small, so you won't see it leaning. You can't bring anything back with a telescope that have something that physically obstructs the eye sight in front of it. Snap out of it.

I'm currently arguing with a twit on another thread about this talking point. Now he wants me to pay him money to explain himself🤦‍♂️ The first thing we must realise, is that the curve doesn't start at the horizon. The horizon is just the point at which you notice the curve. Lets be generous and say the boat is 10 miles out and so it's already starting to drop below the horizon. Full circumference of earth =24900 miles. 10 miles out of 24900 is 0.04% of the circumference. Circle =360° 0.04% of 360° is 0.14°. Would you notice a lean of 0.14°?

@@danielverwey4701if math was easy or convincing to flat earthers then they wouldn’t be flat earthers.