Forum menu
The Burj al Khalifa in Dubai is 0.6 miles tall. it's so tall that you can watch the sunset on the ground then jump in an express elevator to the top and watch it all over again. The sun sets approx 2-3 minutes later when viewed from the top of the tower than when viewed from ground level.
After it was opened the local Department of Islamic Affairs issued a fatwa telling residents in floors 50-149 to delay breaking their fast during Ramadan by two minutes and if they lived on the 150th floor or above by 3 minutes.
https://www.thenational.ae/uae/fatwa-means-late-iftar-on-top-burj-khalifa-floors-1.432286
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14437334
( I'd page @GrahamS if such things were allowed and the tagging worked.)
It’s CGI.
You've forgotten the effect of the giant ice wall at the edge. Of course you can see the sun for longer from a high point!
That and hundreds of years of systematic observations by Islamic scholars. Particularly after the decline of Greek civilisation they took over the record keeping
I should imagine ancient Arabic scholars had that sussed well before Burj al Khalifa.
It's perspective apparently.
I've never understood how but apparently saying "perspective" explains it and if I don't undestand that it's my own fault for not doing my own research.
At least that's what I've been told.
Tom Cruise can do it just by running up the outside of it.
As long as nobody from Fast and Furious runs into him on their way down.
OK I'll bite,
Shirely you wont be dammed for being 3 seconds late to make a symbolic statement?
It’s perspective apparently.
Yeah, as far as my primitive brain can see, even if the planet was flat, charging to the top of a building that tall, you’d get to see the sun still setting after it had set when you’re on the ground. Possibly. But I could be rong.
Just standing on high ground on the coast near a shipping lane with a telescope or binoculars watching ships come and go shows the world is a sphere, because you can see a vessel gradually disappear from the bottom up, a fact that flat-earth eras choose to ignore, or use some convoluted bullshit to explain.
I’d page @GrahamS if such things were allowed and the tagging worked.
And suddenly, as if by magic, the shopkeeper appeared...
Yeah they just dismiss stuff like that with their own special version of perspective (generally mocked as "flerspective"). Basically flat earthers like to claim that the "local Sun" only appears to set due to vanishing points.
The fact that it doesn't actually get any smaller as it gets "further away" doesn't seem to bother them.
They explain ships sinking below the horizon with the same "logic".
A more interesting proof with The Burj though is that a given mass will be very slightly lighter at the top than at the bottom. A nice demonstration F = G.m1.m2 / r²
Just take a level on a plane man! The truth. The truth!
What if there was a treadmill at the top with a plane on it?
because you can see a vessel gradually disappear from the bottom up,
like the titanic?
that must be why it’s only old folk go on cruises. It’s a one way ticket
A more interesting proof with The Burj though is that a given mass will be very slightly lighter at the top than at the bottom. A nice demonstration F = G.m1.m2 / r²
Top will age quicker too
That and hundreds of years of systematic observations by Islamic scholars. Particularly after the decline of Greek civilisation they took over the record keeping
And just to be picky (although it seems like the correct thread for it 😁 )...
There were a thousand years between the decline of the classical Greeks and start of Islam. One didn’t take over from the other.
Apparently if you use a Nikon p1000 you can bring the sun back into view over the horizon after it's set.
I’ve never understood how but apparently saying “perspective” explains it
I was going to propose a thought experiment, but then I realized I don't know how.
Yeah, as far as my primitive brain can see, even if the planet was flat, charging to the top of a building that tall, you’d get to see the sun still setting after it had set when you’re on the ground. Possibly. But I could be rong.
If the Earth was flat, the Sun would never set, @CountZero. I was being a little sarcastic.
As @GrahamS alluded (ignoring various other issues) it would get smaller and smaller if it did indeed "moves so far away that our eyes can't see it anymore".
And just to be picky (although it seems like the correct thread for it 😁 )…
There were a thousand years between the stw discussion thread and the news article linked in the op.
ish
Top will age quicker too
It's still pre coffee so 8 might be on completely the wrong track but wouldn't they age slower what with moving faster and all?
I likes to sit at the front of the bus, coz I get there quicker.
Believers dont need proof to believe, so giving them proof to disprove thier beliefs is equally flawed. Flat earthers are like most religious / myth belivers. So long as they dont bother anyone they can be left alone.
So long as they dont bother anyone they can be left alone.
True but...
1) there are many "flat earthers" on YouTube who are essentially just cult leaders. I think many/most of those type know full well that they are talking bollocks, but they make a good income from it (ads, merchandise, books, Super Chats, Patreon, conferences etc). Basically they make a living by preying on vulnerable/gullible/mentally-ill people. I don't like that.
2) Flat Earth is the extreme end of a fast growing anti-science anti-intellectual movement that has worrying implications for all of us. See also: anti-vax, 5G, chemtrails, Plandemic/Covidiots, etc. Conspiracy talking points are now prevalent enough to influence political decisions! (e.g. Trump benefits from quietly playing to the QAnon crowd).
3) xkcd
A more interesting proof with The Burj though is that a given mass will be very slightly lighter at the top than at the bottom. A nice demonstration F = G.m1.m2 / r²
Only if you use the same scales everyone uses on their "27lb" trail bikes
The Flat Earth conspiracy fascinates me. There are plenty of other daft conspiracies out there but Flat Earthers seem to have gone to a lot more effort to "prove" their theory than your average chemtrail wingnut.
As an epistemological exercise its pretty interesting
If the Earth was flat, the Sun would never set,
That would depend on how the "flat Earth" orbited the sun. It could potentially set for six months at a time.
how the “flat Earth” orbited the sun
Nul points
how the “flat Earth” orbited the sun
I think you'll find the sun orbits the earth, don't listen to those idiots who go on about Turtles though.
As an epistemological exercise its pretty interesting
Yeah I've learnt a lot by looking at information and experiments to debunk flat earth.
It is quite a challenge trying to come up with physical observable demonstrations that use no prior knowledge and can be performed using household objects!
how the “flat Earth” orbited the sun
You greatly underestimate how dumb the flat earth conspiracy is. Most (though not all) subscribe to a model where:
- space does not exist.
- gravity does not exist.
- stars are just lights in the sky/dome/firmament.
- the Sun is small, close (some say 3000 miles) and moves in a circle over the flat earth, once per day.
- At the June Solstice the close Sun is directly over the Tropic of Cancer, by December Solstice it is over the Tropic of Capricorn. That causes the seasons.
https://www.livescience.com/63648-flat-earth-explanation-for-the-equinox.html
@kennyp, I had assumed the usual "model" which is a "small and local sun" describing a circular path above a disc. "Obviously" the disc (or "plane" as is the more common) doesn't orbit anything as it's not moving since "we don't feel the movement so we aren't moving".
It's bewildering willful ignorance. Quite entertaining though.
I wonder if scimandan or the creaky blinder are aware of this
Yeah it's been discussed before @tagnut69. Wolfie6020 even did some nice videos demonstrating the same thing by sending a drone vertically upwards to see the Sun after it had set from ground level.
Wolfie also showed how the setting sun would light up the ceiling of a room in a tower that faced the sunset, which you might think would be pretty damning. But no.
Yeah it’s been discussed before @tagnut69. Wolfie6020 even did some nice videos demonstrating the same thing by sending a drone vertically upwards to see the Sun after it had set from ground level.
The way to disprove the perspective flat earth idea would be to do this same experiment near the 'middle' and near the 'edge'. You'd expect to be able to see more of the sun below the plane of the disc if you were near the edge and went up to the same altitude.
However in the real (round) world you'd see slightly less of the sun at the same altitude near the equator because it is on a steeper trajectory and disappears more quickly round the curve.
I mean yeah, if we could persuade them to travel then we could get them to go to the South Pole and observe six months of 24 hour Sun that roundly disproves their model.
But they won't do that. They blindly claim it's not possible to go there because of the Antarctic Treaty (not true) and that any videos of 24 hour Sun in the South are fake. Wilful ignorance.
...near the ‘edge’
Oh you're so niave. "They" won't let you anywhere near the edge as they patrol it with Navy gunships to stop you seeing it. The Antartic Treaty "proves" that. Apparently.
You can prove it yourself, just by lying on a beach facing a sunset and then standing up. Even that difference in height is enough to see a sliver of Sun reappearing.
Of course, because you can see further when you are higher up. That's just perspective (flerspective).
Yeah okay, but if the sun is small and close and always above the "plane" why do we even see it set?
Is the horizon also a result of this special type of "perspective"
Don't make the mistake thinking flat means actually flat, it just means not spherical. A slightly convex shape makes a lot of these issues much less problematic
A slightly convex shape makes a lot of these issues much less problematic
Splitter! That's globist shill talk
Yeah okay, but if the sun is small and close and always above the “plane” why do we even see it set?
Is the horizon also a result of this special type of “perspective”
I believe the answer to this one is "do your own research".
Yes, there are incorrect answers to all these issues with their "models". People go round and round. It does get boring after a while but if you really want to head off down that rabbit hole, be my guest. It's literally a fantastic realm to enter.
It's been said in other threads but Cool Hard Logic on YouTube does a brilliant series about it all.
That and hundreds of years of systematic observations by Islamic scholars. Particularly after the decline of Greek civilisation they took over the record keeping
And just to be picky (although it seems like the correct thread for it 😁 )...
There were a thousand years between the decline of the classical Greeks and start of Islam. One didn’t take over from the other.
This debate reminds me of the days before I was thrown out of RE at school.
One thing I have never understood about all this - if the Flat-earthers think they are right, then Globism is the conspiracy. Who benefits from the conspiracy of Globism? It must be a costly exercise - silencing the millions of airline pilots and crew, for a start.
Who benefits from the conspiracy of Globism?
Zoe Ball?
Proving the earth is a globe to people who believe the earth is flat is a total non starter.
Other than the obvious cult-leaders that GrahamS identifies, and I know who he's talking about, and they are pretty awful people mostly, then the rest are just idiots
If we're recommending videos, Behind The Curve is essential viewing. It's on Netflix, maybe other platforms too.
One thing I have never understood about all this – if the Flat-earthers think they are right, then Globism is the conspiracy. Who benefits from the conspiracy of Globism? It must be a costly exercise – silencing the millions of airline pilots and crew, for a start.
I always wondered this about the moon landing deniers. Assuming for the sake of argument that the moon landings were faked, it does rather beg the question as to why. NASA went to an awful lot of trouble and effort, it'd have been easier for them to actually go there than to fake it to any sort of convincing degree that still holds up to scrutiny today. And surely the most compelling argument here is that they went back - a good magician never repeats a trick for fear of being caught out.
it’d have been easier for them to actually go there than to fake it to any sort of convincing degree that still holds up to scrutiny today.
Its not even a question of motivation or effort. At the time it was possible to go to the moon, regardless of how extraordinary the effort involved was, But was impossible to fake it. The audio visual technology didn't exist for the broadcasts everyone watched to be fake.
Yeah, that's what they want you to think...
Is the horizon also a result of this special type of “perspective”
Yes!
A good example of flat earther mentality can be found in their bold claim that "the horizon always appears to rise to eye level" (because of flerspective and the flat earth).
Now that's pretty easy to disprove with the help of a homemade water level and a hill:
But if you check out the comments on that video you will see that they do not accept that simple demonstration. Most brilliantly they insist that isn't the real horizon. Others just stubbornly refuse to admit what they are seeing.
As of right now the latest comment says "The horizon always flat to the observer, but it always rises to eye level with the observer who takes flight, no matter how high the observer ascends" despite the video clearly demonstrating that is not true.
"Fifteen degrees per hour drift",
Thanks Bob!
Some will get the reference. For those that don't check out on YouTube amongst others;
Sci Man Dan
Conspiracy Catz
Mr Sensible and
Blue Marble Science.
Catz is the funniest and has a brilliant edit, but all are worth a look if you like to face-palm frequently.
It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.
- Johnathan Swift