Can You Figure out What's Missing in the Chicago Skyline Image? Flat Earthers Never Pass This Test.

in science •  7 years ago  (edited)

Despite the fact that I've written articles debunking flat earth using some of the most simple observable ways possible to understand how to determine for yourself that the earth is a sphere, people have still complained that the math is too complicated.

I've even explained Why The Earth Looks So Flat if It's a Sphere and given multiple ways we can know it's not flat, but flat earthers still insist that it looks flat, therefore it is. No further inquiry necessary for them to claim to have overturned over 2000 years of scientific inquiry on the subject.


Image Credit: Mlive.com Fair Use Claim

So, today I'm addressing how we know the earth is curved through simple observations of what can't be seen. While it may sound a bit oxymoronic to observe what we can't see, you'll see, as the image above illustrates, why it makes perfect sense and why people for millenia have used this fact as evidence for a round earth.

We have already discussed how and why things disappear over the horizon in the article Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about the Horizon, where we also debunked the flat earth claim that objects disappear bottom first due to perspective, as in the image below of objects actually disappearing due to perspective, but not disappearing bottom first.


Image Credit: Cherry Point Marines
Example of Vanishing Point. Note how the cones do not disappear bottom first, but simply get smaller and smaller until they seem to vanish in the distance

Using Missing Parts of Buildings Confirms the Globe

Since it's difficult to know exactly how far ships are away from us, buildings are a better choice for determining if the distances match the curvature of the earth, or are truly just at their vanishing point, as flat earthers claim.

Fortunately, we have ample photographs of this too, often thanks to flat earthers who think they have proved the earth is flat, while they ignore the missing bottoms of the buildings they are photographing. Some of the most famous and controversial are the Chicago Skyline images which, like the image in my post This is the Single Best Evidence Flat Earthers Have, and it Still Proves the Earth is a Sphere was taken by a photographer who actually waited for the correct mirage conditions to get the shot when he otherwise would not be able to, and also states the earth is a spherical, since he knows he cannot get these types of shots on a regular basis, as would be expected on a flat earth.


Image Credit: Joshua Nowicki from his Facebook Page

Interestingly, this image first featured on a local TV station as evidence of mirage conditions. Flat earthers hilariously, though think these types of mirage conditions are a lie despite the newscaster having not only predicted mirage conditions the night before this image aired, but he actually shows what those conditions look like! Both the newscast showing the photo and the newscast predicting it are in this follow-up article from the news station called Skyline Skepticism, the Lake Michagan Mirage.

In science, the best measure of a good theory is it's ability to predict events accurately; something this newscaster did accurately, but that no flat earth model can do. If you want to shut down a flat earther, just ask them to predict any natural event whatsoever, such as moon phases or an eclipse.

Showing What is Missing

But flat earthers were not satisfied with this, and demanded that the Chicago image is NOT a mirage. One flat earther set out to prove this, and did a video on his bid to Prove the Chicago Skyline Image is Not a Mirage by taking a boat across Lake Michigan while filming the skyline. While he predictably declared victory and maintains the earth is flat, he seems to have not watched his own video.

Fortunately, others did and, by showing what is missing in Skiba's video, proved the earth to not only curve, but to be a globe the size of the earth. The image below is a compilation of the images in the Skiba video at different distances from the skyline and then overlaid with an image of the full sized tower matched to the same size.


Image Credit: The Quagmire Via Flat Earth Math

Here's a closeup of the 31 mile image of the Willis Tower overlaid with an image of the full tower down to the shoreline to show how much of the building is actually missing.


Image Credit: Rob Skiba. Edit by Me. Note, this is the same building, the left image has just been taken from a different angle than the right one.

See how much of the building is missing? For most people, this would be sufficient proof that the horizon is the curvature of the earth and the building is behind it, but not so for flat earthers who will say the building is simply disappearing by perspective.

In this particular case, Skiba went across the lake and took different images at different distances, giving us several data points. With this data, we can take this one step further and, by how much of the buildings are missing at what distance, can plot this on a graph to show whether the distances are consistent with the earth as a sphere the size of our own.


Image Credit: The Quagmire

Sure enough, plotting the distances proves that the amount of the buildings missing is not due to arbitrary environmental conditions or perspective, but is measurable and predictable as the same amount of curvature we would expect on a sphere the size of the earth.

I promised that I would not go into the math since the 'complex math' was the complaint in one of my previous articles. However, without some degree of math, there is no possibility of refuting claims such as objects disappearing bottom first due to refraction verses being due to the curvature of the earth. Anyone who is interested can visit the rebuttal video below which goes into the math used to create this graph.

I hope this clarifies some of these concepts for anyone who may not understand how science knows for sure the earth is a sphere. Many claims that the earth is flat focus on flat earth claims that globe science is 'scientism' or 'pseudoscience' because they claim:

  1. They are unable to see the curvature
  2. Mainstream science is not observable or measurable by most people
  3. No one has ever measured the curvature

Yet that is exactly what we did here, and did it using a video from a flat earher, so they can't scream the video was faked or was CGI, like they continually do with any videos or images that do not support their ridiculous claims. We've shown here that science of the globe is not only observable and measurable, but repeatable, falsifiable, and better yet, predictable.

This article shows that we see the curvature all the time. The ability of a theory to predict what we will observe is the hallmark of good science and, using the globe model, we can predict how much of buildings will be missing at different distances. Not only that, but the globe model predicts other natural phenomenon such as eclipses, meteor showers, moon phases, and much more that the flat earth model does not and cannot predict. Sorry, flat earthers, the earth is not flat, but a sphere, and one the size science claims it is. And yes, this fact is actually science, as we just proved.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

"Globe-head" scientists predict that a lunar eclipse will be visible across the western US during the early morning hours of January 31. The heliocentric globe model explains when, why, and how it will occur to extreme precision. Where is the flat earth explanation? You've got about 5 weeks, folks...

We in the sailing community have been using this method to calculate your distance at sea from the coast from your present postion ! As the height of the lighthouse visible on the horizon when standing up with binoculars can give surprsingly accurate results when saling off the coast ! Why indeed lighthouse are famously painted with alternate red or black and white stripes as this aids in the calculation when the height of the identified lighthouse is a known and reported fact in your coastal maritime guidebook, trusted friend of any old salt at sea ! Flatearthers are idiots that do need to fall off their planet and leave us normal thinking human beings alone to concentrate on more important isuues like, why is poisonous flouride added to our water !! ) great post upvoted @kerriknox

How close is the estimated distance (to the actual distance) when you're eyeballing it like that?

How do you know how much of the lighthouse is below visibility? I presume all lighthouses are not the same height......and...do you count the black and white stripes down as some kind of standardized measurement per stripe?

here check this and you will see how indeed that photo you published is a flat earthers worst nightmare as this is an age old method of measuring distance from a boat to the coast !!

http://www.skysailtraining.co.uk/dipping_distance.htm

Awesome example @gomeravibz. Great link too.

Yeah thanks @jasonbu ) this is the the one that will shut all these flatearther idiots mouths as there can be no denying history and the culture and knowledge of centuries of navigating on this round planet on the sea !!

What the skyline is missing is the 500ft statue of Michael Jordan that they never did get around to building...but he would have deserved it!

Other than that, a lovely exercise in reason, perspective and explanation!

People are still discussing if the earth is flat or not? ROTFL!
get over it already !

No. you got the wool pulled over your eyes my child.

Awesome share @KerriKnox

Could you please explain how refraction, which requires specific conditions and sharp changes in atmospheric conditions, as well as distinct angles of entry/exit of the different medium, is responsible for all cases of an object being much more visible than the curvature formula dictates? I have yet to see one clear example of a distant object cut off at the expected amount due to curvature WITHOUT refraction. Nor have I seen an example of an object cut off more than expected due to refraction in the other direction (can't use up or down since globers often confuse this with refraction) ie. opposite from the upward/downward curve of globers bendy light.

There is no reason for refraction to only bring objects up and never make them appear more behind a curve. In any case I've looked at, the hidden amount could be more easily explained by refraction on a flat plane than refraction on a sphere. Atmospheric lensing that occurs as a result of diffraction, if I understand it correctly, seems more likely to be the case for objects appearing partially obscured (but still not nearly as much as required for the Earth to be a sphere). This could be proven with a test with very precise distance measurements and a known FOV calculation for the image frame. Or a picture suggesting curvature with the moon in frame as well, gives a fairly accurate reference point for determining apparent angular size. If a distant object is magnified just 30%, 15% will be hidden behind the horizon. If there is any magnification present on the globe model, it works against the expected drop and should make distant objects disappear even closer. We never observe this. I'm curious if you are aware of Anthony Riley's recent video showing the Isle of Man in it's entirety from about 100 KM away. Mountains in Ireland can arguably be seen as well at a globe impossible distance of well over 200 KM. The fact is there are many examples where extreme refraction doesn't even come close to accounting for the missing curvature. The refraction excuse is not good enough for me, sorry.

Loading...

@heathcarmody, you can't even debate the evidence presented by @kerriknox so you just ramble on about refraction not making sense to you. Its not a valid argument to just list some numbers and vaguely describe an experiment that should be performed when all available evidence points to a spherical earth.

Amazing post @kerriknox thanks for sharing

I have no idea.. this is interesting

if you're interested in FE real research and information do follow my channel.

So in this so called " Proof " For Ball Globe " Pear ? " Shaped Earth

I'm disappointed the problem is people believe the crap you post.

Take a telescope and zoom in. Perspective proves FE no matter what.

You can argue angles refraction bla bla... You cant see a curve from 300k Feet in the sky and you trying to see a curve from here ? Cool Story. I am just waiting for some real Flat Earthers to come in here and Demolish you.

LOL. Excellent cult talking points and misrepresentation of the globe model without evidence or discussing the evidence presented. What a good little cult follower you are.