Hold this "meek". That wasn't his diss song, it was his sons, something even a 1 celled organism would know.
First calm dafuq down.
No one has even claimed the earth is 100% spherical. There is a slight bulge below the equator which is where 'pear shaped' comes from.
Independent citizens of earth can't prove curvature of the earth...?
The earth is not a perfect circle it is elliptical meaning roundish but not a perfect circle. And many factors determine distance you're talking about a heavenly body here...again it's a thing called gravity. To put it into perspective, you don't "drop" from earth if you ran down a circular ball and gravity was always acting on you you wouldn't feel or notice a drop because that isn't how physics work. Your assumption only works if gravity were not a thing same reason how the people in Australia at the botyom right don't percieve themselves that way no more do Americans feel upper left.
Yes I am aware they say it is an oblate spheroid or something of that nature, however....
I never said people fall down neither did I deny the existence of gravity please read again. What I meant by "drop" is the curvature, there should be a curve down of 6.6 feet for every mile in every direction. Gravity has nothing to do with this this is something to do with geometry.
I don't get what you're trying to say with the Neil thing. Where did he say it was practically a perfect sphere? In the video he even says something to the effect of -- below the equator there is a bulge that is further from the core of the earth than the north pole is respectively.
[video=youtube;WwimocU0IIc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwimocU0IIc[/video]
The Earth as I said is not a perfect sphere and you cannot rule out gravity just because it doesn't suit your argument when gravity is the core basis and reason for virtually all shape if we're talking pure physics here. There is no "drop" or to say consistent curvature because mass is unevenly distributrd. Atmospheric mass is not the same as land mass. Also again you're disputing two different perspective. You basically took the top of an apple to explain why the bottom of an apple is not the same shape. While I do applaud your find himans have an easier tine precieving air larger than we perceive pure land that's forced perspective on your part for the picture to look at it purely from an atmospheric mass standpoint than the land you want to discuss. I would have to say you didn t use land perspective because Neil alrwady addressed that but instead use the sky perspective which is fine but cannot be used to justify the "drop" why? You cannot change atmospheric air mass in the literal sense however land mass is consistently changing. And I knew what you mean I am saying gravity plays the biggest part in whether the "curvature drop" should be perceived at all. Also I'll just leave this here for future doubts
Did you watch the whole video? He said at the end that from a cosmic stand point the earth is practically a perfect sphere or something of that nature.
They don't because their sensors don't register this, the pilots never tilt the noses of their planes as they fly, they change altitude but not orthogonality.
It still uses a convex lense, when a lense correcter is used the images are completely flat. Let me remind you I never said the earth was flat but no man that isn't affiliated with the organisations I mentioned can independently prove it is round either.
Yes the atmosphere can be used because as Degrasse tyson said if you were a cosmic being you wouldn't even feel the geographical features of the earth if you touched it because they were so tiny. This shows that the geographical features or land mass don't affect the shape of the earth to the degree that you likely assume they do.
