What does the Flat Earth Look Like From Space, with Perspective?

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Metabunk 2018-06-28 09-35-55.jpg

Flat earth folk seem to have no problem in visualizing the flat earth like this, as a disk, with the sun rotating around it.

But if this is what it looks like from "space" then why can't you see the sun from Europe? Perspective?

It might be interesting to ask a genuine flat earth believer what they think the view of the earth would be if they were to fly up to the point where the virtual camera is in the above image, and keep looking at the Earth. What do they think they would see, and why?

Here's the position of the camera in this scene.
Metabunk 2018-06-28 09-45-09.jpg
 

Majd Saedy

New Member
Perspective can't hide the sun, even at the accepted distances by most Flat-earthers:
A sun 12,000 miles away (about the maximum distance it can be on a 24,000 miles flat earth) and 3000 miles up would still be quite visible at an angle of about arctan(3000/12000) = 14° above the horizon.

(correct me if I am wrong or if I misrepresented the accepted FE distances)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Perspective can't hide the sun, even at the accepted distances by most Flat-earthers:
Yes, we know that. The question here is what Flat Earther's think the world would look like from space.

The idea is really to make them think about it from a different perspective.
 

Majd Saedy

New Member
Yes, we know that. The question here is what Flat Earther's think the world would look like from space.
The idea is really to make them think about it from a different perspective.
I know that you know, I'm just trying to get an explanation or a different view from a FE proponent.

Your question is very interesting indeed, but my understanding is that there is no space outside the FE dome, or is that not the prevalent idea?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Your question is very interesting indeed, but my understanding is that there is no space outside the FE dome, or is that not the prevalent idea?
We they could probably avoid the whole question by saying reality only exists for ten miles above sea level. But it's kind of to get them to think about what their model of the world actually is. Like is it physically a disk with a small ball sun above it? Are there limits to where a camera could be? As you get higher you can see more of the world. What's going on there? What would happen if you continued to rise?

All rather moot points. But might be interesting to get some perspective on the mind of the true believer.
 
As Majd Saedy already stated, there's a dome/fermament in the way so you would never get a camera in that position. Your question would therefore be invalid to them.
 

cloudspotter

Senior Member.
As Majd Saedy already stated, there's a dome/fermament in the way so you would never get a camera in that position. Your question would therefore be invalid to them.
Maybe they could just use their imagination and picture what it would be like if they were able to get through the dome. It's not like anyone is asking them to actually go to space with a camera themselves is it
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
As Majd Saedy already stated, there's a dome/fermament in the way so you would never get a camera in that position. Your question would therefore be invalid to them.
What if you just fly to the top of the dome? It’s a thought experiment.
 

Rory

Senior Member.
The sun is actually on the outside the dome. The dome works like a lens, which bends the light, which explains why the elevation angles don't add up - we're not looking at the actual sun.

As for what it would look like for a viewer outside the dome...gosh; who knows what the laws of physics are on the other side?
 
The sun is actually on the outside the dome.
Have to disagree with you there. The hardcore FEers are hardcore because they've seen clouds 'behind the sun'. Therefore the sun would be in the dome.

Pics:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...0v_bAhWMd94KHcgNCt8Q_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=635
FE Proofs:
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...ome..69i57.10480j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
 
Last edited:

Rory

Senior Member.
I saw a video recently from Dr Zack that shows how the sun is outside the dome. Can't find it now though, so maybe it got taken down.

Jeranism also has a video which says we see the sun through our own individual 'virtual dome'.

I'd post it here but that would mean I'd have to summarise it and that's not something I want to do. ;)

The guys who think clouds can go behind the sun are wrong. They're not main players or true flat earth scientists. They're a little bit behind the curve.

Mainly what I seem to be seeing in flat earth is a dispensing with the idea that there's anything approaching an accurate map; that there's any knowledge of its size or how light works; or that we know what reality is.

Some may say that's a convenient dodge.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Mainly what I seem to be seeing in flat earth is a dispensing with the idea that there's anything approaching an accurate map; that there's any knowledge of its size or how light works; or that we know what reality is.

Some may say that's a convenient dodge.
It's dodging empirical evidence. There quite clearly ARE accurate maps, which we use every day. We also have a vast amount of verifiable info about light (and hence about image forming, cameras, and eyes)

If they go down that road they have just descended into Solipsism/Mandela/Matrix, and there's no real point following.
 

Chameleon

New Member
(Signed up specifically to answer this, not a flat earther, but I do create/think up hypothetical worlds that run on rules other than our reality).

Your second picture shows that the sun emits a cone of light downwards, so from the point of view of the camera in the first picture you wouldn't be able to see the sun - it's there to show where the sun is in the model. Vision is dependent upon light, if there is no light coming from the point of the sun to the point of observation then you cannot see the sun (whether that is from "space" or from europe).

So (from the reality of the model in the first image) a photograph from "space" would look exactly like the first image but without the yellow circle of the sun.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Your second picture shows that the sun emits a cone of light downwards, so from the point of view of the camera in the first picture you wouldn't be able to see the sun - it's there to show where the sun is in the model. Vision is dependent upon light, if there is no light coming from the point of the sun to the point of observation then you cannot see the sun (whether that is from "space" or from europe).
But they are not claiming that the sun is a simple spotlight. A spotlight would not set. A perfect idealized spotlight with no leaking light would get smaller, dimmer and then go out. What their theory attempts to explain is why the sun looks like it sets.

To explain this they invoke "perspective", which essentially require light to bend.

The point here is to try to get people to think about how (and if) things look different from far away.
 

Chameleon

New Member
So.. The constraints are: has all of the observable properties of our current reality, but also matches the model? That obviously breaks in multiple ways (via the multiple proofs that the earth is a globe).

My response was based upon the model being accurate and absolute and then deriving from there (yes, in that reality the sun doesn't set fully, I hadn't explored that. Seems like an interesting world).

If the only extra constraint is that the sun also has to set, you could throw in a physical law that states that light bends at the edge of the cone? A band of the atmosphere that heats up in daylight and causes refraction at the interface between night and day such that the sun appears to pass the horizon? Seems more plausible than invoking "perspective" (though likely has its own issues). Which was your point, I guess, "perspective" isn't an adequate answer.
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
If the only extra constraint is that the sun also has to set, you could throw in a physical law that states that light bends at the edge of the cone?
I have begun to make a point in discussions with FE believers who bring up the multiple distortions and 'bendings' that they need to explain celestial occurrences (including the different star constellations visible in the Southern hemisphere).

The point I bring up is this:

If all these things (bending perspective etc.) can fool your eyes so entirely - why would that stop precisely at the horizon?
How can you firmly trust your eyes when you state "I can't see any curvature"?
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
brad fuller Does the inverse-square law apply to the flat-earth debunking tool chest? Flat Earth 4
Mick West Explained: Why a Spirit Level on a Plane Does Not Show Curvature "Corrections" Flat Earth 98
Z.W. Wolf Does Sundial Disprove Flat Earth? Flat Earth 17
Mick West Why Does the Atmosphere Not Fly off into the Vacuum of Space? Flat Earth 21
Mick West What does "Off-World" mean to the US Military? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 9
J Why Does the Sun Rise and Set In a Straight Line? Flat Earth 14
Joe Hill WTC7: Does This "Look Like" a Controlled Implosion? 9/11 45
J Does google earth pro simulate refraction [No] Flat Earth 7
creatonez Explained: Why the Earth does not look oblate in photos from space Flat Earth 0
Tom Binney Does my FE Debunk in this case make sense to you guys? Practical Debunking 23
ConfusedHominid Need Debunking (Claim): Metabunk Curve Calculator Does Not Calculate for Angular Size Flat Earth 13
S Explained: Why does this Apollo11 photo act so weirdly? Conspiracy Theories 13
FolsomG10 Does Zooming in Change How Much of Something is Hidden by the Horizon [No] Flat Earth 54
Trailblazer Why does Polaris appear stationary on a rotating Earth? Flat Earth 16
izz Does this photo show a too-small hole in the Pentagon? [No] 9/11 28
Supreme Logic Why does the equator stay warm all year? Conspiracy Theories 7
P Does Orlando victim switch legs when he switches languages [No] Conspiracy Theories 8
Rory Does the Earth's Curvature Vary with Latitude? [No, not significantly] Flat Earth 34
Gamolon Does Mick West's WTC model meet the Heiwa Challenge? 9/11 25
aka How does this Domino Tower Collapse relate to 9/11 Collapses 9/11 75
mrfintoil Study: When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not) Practical Debunking 3
Tony Szamboti Does the exclusion of stiffness from Nordenson's falling girder calculations demonstrate anything? 9/11 288
william wiley Does Damage to MH17 indicate or exclude a Particular Buk Launch Location? Flight MH17 662
Hama Neggs Where does "Scientist" end and "debunker" begin? Practical Debunking 16
Steve Funk Does Guy McPherson believe in chemtrails? [No] Contrails and Chemtrails 21
Ogmion Does DNA emit light General Discussion 8
T How Does This Failed Demolition Relate to the Collapse of the WTC Towers? 9/11 14
Leifer Erin Brokovich does not believe in chemtrails. Contrails and Chemtrails 64
Trailblazer SkyderALERT: where does the money go? Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Leifer does Social Media + Ego help drive conspiracy theories ? General Discussion 63
David Fraser Super/subscript, how does one do it? Site Feedback & News 4
qed Why does the Lunar Lander leave not tracks Conspiracy Theories 44
Mick West The Johnson and Johnson Settlement, where does it fit in the conspiracy world Conspiracy Theories 13
qed Does concrete melt? 9/11 84
hiper Does Seismic Evidence Imply Controlled Demolition on 9/11 9/11 101
Mick West How Much Does Metabunk.org Cost to Run? Site Feedback & News 17
MikeC Video that does actually support hypothesis with evidence Contrails and Chemtrails 1
fonestar Why does JFK's Head go back after he's shot from the back? [warning: contains gore] Conspiracy Theories 178
Cairenn How much does a storm weigh? Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Mick West Does NIST not testing for explosives and not testing WTC7 steel invalidate everything 9/11 246
Mick West How Much Money Does Alex Jones Make? People Debunked 17
Critical Thinker What does Greenpeace think about chemtrails? Contrails and Chemtrails 34
iKnowWhoYouAre why does this site even exist? General Discussion 134
Canadasix If its just contrails why does it start from the east and work it's way west? Contrails and Chemtrails 10
scombrid Does drug use cause paranoia or do paranoids seek out psychoactive drugs? General Discussion 7
Leifer Rabies does not exist. Conspiracy Theories 8
U Why does this site not debunk government and corporate wrongdoings? Site Feedback & News 4
Juror No. 8 Does the U.S. government manufacture terrorism? If so, why? General Discussion 99
firepilot Does Roxy Lopez have callers on her friday internet show? Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Pogopoint99 Does Rosalind Peterson believe in chemtrails? Contrails and Chemtrails 17
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top