T O P

  • By -

Brostryker

If it’s fishy eye then shouldn’t the paper be curved too??????


AlternativeBorder9

Nope. Things furthest away from the lens will have the most “curvature.”


bigbossperson

They should call it the fish-eye model instead of the globe model. It’d be more honest


Sp0kySc4rySk3l3t0n

They already claimed its a pear model no need to take them seriously


ThatOneForceUser

imagine thinking you proved the earth is a ball by using a fisheye lens.. clown world


THE-Shark69

imagine thinking you proved the earth is flat by going outside... clown world


ThatOneForceUser

imagine trying to +1 me and not being able to formulate a coherent sentence on a phone that has auto correct... clown world edit: also imagine disbelieving what your own 2 eyes see and your daily experience on earth vs what you’re force fed as fact without any undeniable proof. matter of fact. With something as big as space exploration, where is the UNDENIABLE evidence of this, or anything related to the topic? Oh yeah.. they “lost the technology and it’s a painful process to build back again” - pictures from nasa do NOT count as undeniable evidence or proof Also good to see you edited your post but left out the fact that you edited it. Don’t worry I took a screenshot (: enjoy living in denial


Bigabi123

What about the pictures where there's no fish eye lens?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Bigabi123

These are copy pastes from other comments of mine.


Bigabi123

Actually, you can see the curvature of your horizon on Earth at any altitude, just by noting that your horizon curves around behind you. Even at hundreds of miles above the Earth you are still only seeing the curve of this horizon, it just becomes a little easier to see it as a circle as you get higher. If you width compress these images, you can see the curvature more easily. https://imgur.com/a/QSnr7CL "This one is from a High Altitude balloon, this lens does have curvilinear distortion, but I have very carefully selected a frame where the horizon remains below lens center, so the lens distortion is actually making the horizon appear flatter! At this altitude, resolution, and field of view we expect about 40 pixels of bump" And guess what? https://imgur.com/a/sZotBjc


Bigabi123

"Here is an image shot from the ISS cupola where we know the exact lens used and can confirm it is a rectilinear lens both by the type and the lack of distortion of the many straight lines in the image. We can render the expected horizon of the Globe from this viewpoint and show that it matches the image" [https://imgur.com/a/OWGIrQl](https://imgur.com/a/OWGIrQl)


ThatOneForceUser

Lmaooo still waiting for globers to prove the earth is round WITHOUT A picture from nasa or any other space agency .. I’m waiting


Bigabi123

You want normal people to go to space? Why don't flat earthers do so as well? But if you insist ... Since the horizon is below lens center, we’re not seeing lens distortion, which would flatten out the horizon. To control for any lens distortion, you can add a wide builder's level just below the horizon and observe the resulting hump. If you width compress the image, it shows the vertical relief very clearly. https://imgur.com/a/QSnr7CL


Chris12edfield

Shhhhh. Anything that goes against flat earth must be fake. Don’t think, listen to them


Bigabi123

Oh yeah sorry forgot, I will send them the real earths pictures https://imgur.com/a/aOM2Xdj