Flat Earth Experiments

How the Sun Works on Flat Earth - Part 2
Globe Skeptic

This guy is as good as it can get, as far as flat earth experiments:



Flat Earth: PROOF GPS Satellites Do Not Exist
Aaron Dover

Not exactly on flat earth, but on satellites, which are very related to flat earth.

Flat Earth - The Sun - a Rise and Set Simulation
BUSHMAN WANNABE - Flat Earth Survival

Related post:
fsr.boards.net/post/3927/thread


High precision measurements here. For a while it had me thinking that this proves the curvature of the earth. I am not sure, because the smaller yellow section (long about 30 meters) at bottom could shrink both because the earth has a curvature and because, due to distance, the windmills get smaller and smaller.

Also, the title "Distant Objects Disappear On The Horizon" is misleading, or rather "equivocal", because it's not clear if he is stating that they disappear just because they "seem" to disappear by getting smaller and smaller, or because they disappear "behind" the curvature. I am not even sure if the video is a flat earth video or a flat earth debunking video. He does not make either case.



Distant Objects Disappear On The Horizon - Part I - Experiment Preview - Nikon P900 [Windmills]
PartOfYou




Distant Objects Disappear On The Horizon - Part II - Actual Experiment - Nikon P900 [Windmills]
PartOfYou




Distant Objects Disappear On The Horizon - Experiment Part III - Nikon P900 [Windmills]
PartOfYou




Distant Objects Disappear On The Horizon - Experiment Part IV - Nikon P900 [Windmills]
PartOfYou


So, as a summary, the big question I have about that experiment is this. Is the windmill on the left shorter (due to being more submerged) than the one on the right? Because, since it is the one farther from the vantage point, then this would seem to prove a spherical earth:



I can't be positive, but I would tend to say that it just gets smaller. In other words, the windmill, being farther, gets smaller, and, as a consequence, the yellow section at the bottom, too, gets smaller. But for a few minutes, it made me scared that the earth is actually spherical and I've been wasting months.

Horizon Rising Flat Earth Sunset
bmlsb69

These two experiments seem like a joke, and there's irony in both of them, but in fact they are serious, and they should make us think... that gravity and atmosphere are most likely bullshit:



The real flat earth experiment that proofs it all!
Gerard Frensen

------

He is referring to this other experiment by Russianvids:



Flat Earth vs. Ball Earth Experiment
Russianvids

His curvature calculations do not match mine, but it's still a detailed narration of his flat earth experiment:



Flat Earth - a ship in Holland
Flat Earth Observations

Thank you for being allowed here.

Yes, that's the video I watched as well as the ship in Holland video. In that 'ship' video I think the correct formula is used.
In the video www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSHo-1zCMFE and on the calculation website dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/ it is explained.

In yours you don't keep the height of the observer in mind, but you are right, for the light house info it is less important as most sailors are watching the lighthouse when standing a few meters above the sea. So, the light will be spotted much farther away in spite of the (lack of) curvature.

Good thinking! By not mentioning it, they can always say (later) that the mentioned distance (greater than would be possible on a sphere) is meant for tall ships.
But, as you can see the light also on small ships or on the beach at great distances, the curvature cannot be there.

Let's put it this way, I would be much surprised if the earth is a spinning flying ball.

Btw, why am I a 'Freethinker' (below my username)? I am not.

I don't believe in 'free' thinking. All my thoughts are not my own.

Think for yourself and realize that all your thoughts are not your own. It's all learned, descriptions of all your experiences, observations, feelings and memories, using words. There is not one word that you could call your own.

I can have thoughts without words. 

Nonetheless, your whole argument is a contradiction.  You say to think for yourself to prove to yourself your thoughts are not your own.  You then conflate experiences, observations, memories and feelings, to words.  And then say you cannot call those words your own.

All you do is recognition and naming. What you do not know you cannot recognize and give a name to it.
All that knowledge is learned. It is not your own.

Besides, you are thinking all the time, thoughts are controlling you. There is no 'person' who has these thoughts. There are only thoughts and thoughts about thoughts.