Quick Debunk: YouTube Casco Bay-- Portland, Maine Curvature test #1

UPDATED - he claims he was 38 inches above the water so I have updated this with that observer height although it SURE looks a lot higher than that to me and I've asked for evidence of 38 inches.

However, I also found the distance to that building was only 4.83 miles so I've updated based on these two figures.

Here is the source video:


His claim is 6.38 miles -- I think that the specific building we use here is closer but I'll go with 6.38 miles for now.

UPDATE: That's actually 4.83 miles to the building



At this distance and from the approximately 38 inches above the WATER observation height we find that only about 4.7 feet should be obscured!

I took a frame from around 1:38 and another around 3:39 of the building itself and overlaid them.


And showing the scale match at 9:13 in the video because 'ForestDweller' challenged it without doing his research -- I scaled the building so the windows lie up and we can see the vertical features line up showing that the scale is valid.


'ForestDweller' also tells me I'm not allowed to do this because "I said it was out of proportion because you took it from a shot that was not at the same zoom" -- oh, you mean like those busses in HIS OWN VIDEO?  Yeah, that's how dishonest Flat Earthers are.  If I could do that stepped zoom in with the eeerk, eeerk, eeerk sound I would.


Voilà - there is your curvature.  Is that 4.7 feet (original guess was 6-6.7 feet)?

I dunno -- pretty close I would imagine.

This "Failure to MEASURE" is a common flaw with Flat Earther analysis, "looks flat to me" is good enough for them.

Is it good enough for you?

No, of course not.  Because you think your P900 is as good as a quality telescope...


Yeah, that is a super high quality image.  LOL

You can't make out shit in that pile of turd.

But yet you laughably claimed:

the p900 is basically a hand held telescope.  it has the highest magnification/zoom of any camera on the consumer market.  why are you denying technology? 
I researched lenses before buying this camera---because i already have a sweet lumix gx8  ---you cannot buy a lens which will give this camera, or any dslr the capability of the p900.  
Not even close.

That's a 1/2.3" sensor in your P900 which means you REALLY have a 357mm lens when it says "2000mm equivalent" but you forgot the 5.6 Crop Factor.  So If I shoot with a 400mm lens Full Frame and CROP IT WAY THE HELL DOWN, I get to pretend I have a 2000mm lens too!

Here is what a REAL telescope can do:


This is by Thierry Legault

Your P900 is a DECENT Point & Shoot camera with no interchangeable lens, no true manual focus, a very high crop factor, and a FUN zoom *RANGE*.  But it is a worthless TOY compared to any decent telescope.

Angular resolution is based on diameter (aperture) as related by the formula:

Angular Resolution(Θ) = 1.22 λ/D rad

Visible light peaks around λ = 0.55µm so you can figure

~ 46" (arcsec) for your eye at 3mm pupil
~ 2.516" (arcsec) for 55mm lens

At maximum magnification (357mm) the P900 has an aperture of f/6.5

D=f/N so D=357/6.5 and D ~ 55mm

So your P900 is about as good as a this 50mm telescope which costs $42:


Meanwhile...


Maybe you want to try a real telescope side-by-side with your $42 "telescope"?

Can your P900 do this?


Or This?


No -- it cannot.

It's NOT a telescope -- it is a Point & Shoot camera that gives you $500 images, not $25000 images.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pic Gaspard (3880m)/Grand Ferrand (2758m) from Pic de Finestrelles (2826m) in the Pyrénées

Image
I have some new toys to share in this installment of 'Yes, the Earth really is Curved even though you can see one distant mountain peak from another', so this should be fun! This time we're going to look at a view of two distant mountains from Pic de Finestrelles (2826m) in the Pyrénées , taken by Marc Bret of Beyond Horizons (see also the Flickr album ). Pic Gaspard (3880m) in the Massif des Écrins range at a distance of 443 km. Grand Ferrand (2758m) at a distance of 392.48 km. Our view is right around 42.414466°N, 2.132839°E at about 2826 meters elevation, looking right along the coast. Pic Gaspard/Grand Ferrand from Pic de Finestrelles in the Pyrénées, image by Marc Bret The EXIF metadata shows this image was taken by a Panasonic DMC-FZ72 with a focal length of 215mm -- given the 5.62 crop factor of the 1/2.3" sensor in this camera, this gives you a 35mm equivalent focal length of 1200mm giving a full frame view of 1.644° wide and 1.215° high. Since 1521 x 101...
Read more

Flat Earth Follies: Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly!

Image
Flat Earth Claim Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly! Short Version In the Globe model "LEVEL" follows a sphere of uniform gravity potential. Feel free to disprove that is the case if you can but that is the model. In an airplane, Elevator Trim simply controls the RATE of pitch of an aircraft - not the actual pitch of the plane. A 747 flying at 35,000' would have a flight circumference of  about 2π*(3959+(35000/5280)) ≈ 24916 miles Flying at 570 miles per hour, this plane would fly a fraction of the 360° around given by 360*570/24916 Since that's 1 hour we can divide by 60 to get the degrees per hour: 360*570/24916/60 ≈ 0.137°/minute That is down in the noise since pitch rate is affected by temperature, density, power, and control settings on the plane you simply trim the plane for as close to ZERO vertical speed as you can and you've automatically compensated for all of them at once.  Of course, on a 747 computers do that.  In a small plane the pitc...
Read more

Fort Myers to Naples - Flat Earth failures continue

Image
No amount of curvature is enough for a Flat Earther.  We can SEE the shoreline disappear, and then the bottoms of buildings.  But since they don't understand the geometry of what they see they cannot properly evaluate it. Flat Earth once again fails to understand WHAT the horizon even is. @captscorch @ColdDimSum @nicholaspitts @CobraElDiablo @UnCastellsMes @twatterfull @sciencegecko @skeptropolis @FlatEarthReal Still waiting on my curve pic.twitter.com/zh2zFXmMVi — JACK (@Adidas68Jack) April 24, 2017 And a copy of the image from Jack just in case (which Jack now deleted). I'm going to admit right here at the start that I do not know the EXACT location from which this photo was taken.  Neither does 'Jack'.  However, we both know the APPROXIMATE location to within a few miles because we can see the nearby buildings and at least their rough orientation. But without a higher resolution image I cannot positively identify the distant buildings, and neither can Ja...
Read more