Latest News

Flat Earth Curvature Test Result: FAIL

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn

Scientific Method:
1. Ask Question. 2. Test and observe. 3. Construct Hypothesis.
1. Is the Earth Round? 2. Curvature tests conducted around the world. No curvature detected by anyone, anywhere. 3. No, the earth is not a ball. The empirical evidence does not seem to line up with the theories promoted by NASA and the rest of the 'scientific' community. Houston, we have a problem.

45 Comments on Flat Earth Curvature Test Result: FAIL

  1. SqueakerAlpha // 19th Oct 2015 at 11:23 pm // Reply

    that fomula is only good to about 1000 miles.

  2. SqueakerAlpha // 19th Oct 2015 at 11:34 pm // Reply

    if its not in the video what height are you shooting from, what telescope
    magnification, angle of view, from where , to where.
    This cant really be analysed without identifying a specific picture. I
    might get that out of your video but I didnt catch where this was.

    OK Daytona Beach Florida , a pier from maybe 10 feet altitude.
    then from Grenada about 5′ high and 5 miles distance

    you dont use the curvature formula if you are looking at a distant object
    from a 5′ height and a 5 mile distance the height behind the horizon is 3.4

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 19th Oct 2015 at 11:37 pm // Reply

      +SqueakerAlpha 3 1/2 feet above water hitting sand. Even compensating for
      that, there is no observable curvature.

    • +Curious Life of a Flat Earther 3.5 feet!? Lol how the hell is that paddle
      boarders head around the same height as the horizon if you are only
      elevated 3.5 feet?

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 29th Dec 2015 at 3:27 pm // Reply

      +Miller Lol, do you see the paddle boarder next to him UNDER the horizon?
      The ocean contains what are called “WAVES”. In your previous comment you
      said the camera height seems to be 6 foot, which even at that height the
      entire pier should not be visible from 8 miles!!!!!! I wonder why you spend
      so much of your time commenting on random flat earth videos? are you that
      bored and have nothing better to do?

  3. SqueakerAlpha // 20th Oct 2015 at 1:38 am // Reply

    The lighthouse should show about 50 feet above the horizon. to me that
    doesnt look like 175 feet of lighthouse.
    here is a calculator that may help you visualize whats happening.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 20th Oct 2015 at 3:08 am // Reply

      +SqueakerAlpha My telescope is 3.5 feet above the ground, so somewhere
      between 125 – 170 feet of that lighthouse should be hidden behind the curve
      of the ball. You can clearly see most of it behind the pier, remember, it
      is 12 miles beyond the pier!!!! There is no way that 125-170 feet is
      hidden. That is clearly the majority of the lighthouse.

    • SqueakerAlpha // 20th Oct 2015 at 5:02 am // Reply

      +Curious Life of a Flat Earther
      at 3.4 feet and 16 miles 125 feet should be hidden. I could not see much
      in that picture that looked like a tall lighthouse. I did see a short
      building behind the pier that may have had a light.

    • TreeHuggerLtd // 29th Oct 2015 at 9:12 am // Reply

      +SqueakerAlpha It looked short because it was 16 miles away. 16 miles is a
      considerable distance to spot objects. On a clear day I can see the Sears
      Tower from a bridge near my house (which is about 30 miles away). The Tower
      looks absolutely tiny despite the fact that it is one of the tallest
      buildings in the world.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 29th Oct 2015 at 12:55 pm // Reply

      Exactly, with perspective things get smaller as they get farther away. The
      point is that even as small as it is, most of the lighthouse is still
      obviously visible, which it should NOT be if there was a curve. I will do
      better tests as the weather allows.

  4. Luc Desrochers // 20th Oct 2015 at 2:27 am // Reply

    Great video!

  5. Sly Sparkane // 20th Oct 2015 at 7:48 pm // Reply

    A Flat Earther with a TELESCOPE???? Blasphemy…
    0:47 um… it’s not something you look for unless you know what it is..
    1:09 damn you google… he knows how big the Earth is…
    4:06 …. does anyone else notice the atmospherics… which should be quite
    strong shooting video across breaking waves and drying sand..
    5:35 I know I just said atmospherics… and I know you don’t believe in
    them.. but if you pause at 5:35 and put a ruler on the screen.. The Pier
    ‘seems’ to bow over the waves and then sink as it extends further out in
    the water.. that is refracted light.. thereby (not necessarily disproving)
    in fact distorting you results and therefore making your conclusion tainted
    and your results false.. because back at 1:51, you can clearly see that the
    Pier itself is level.. but at 5:51 and 5:35 it is arched..

    Sorry bud… photographing down a beach’s waveline on an obviously warm day
    is not good for optical measurement.. unless of course you are measuring
    refraction or water / heat based distortion.

    • Sly Sparkane // 4th Jun 2016 at 10:37 pm // Reply

      Post is nearly 8 months old.. whos shilling?

    • Ville Anderr (ReadYourBIble) // 4th Jun 2016 at 10:41 pm // Reply

      +Sly Sparkane I wrote that. You 🙂

    • Sly Sparkane // 4th Jun 2016 at 10:49 pm // Reply

      ah.. ok… so you are saying that pointing out the distortion from the
      temperatures on the beach, making the pier appear curved at 5:35 makes me a
      shill? line it up yourself.. if you also notice that it’s bent.. then
      wouldn’t you be a shill too?

    • Ville Anderr (ReadYourBIble) // 4th Jun 2016 at 11:01 pm // Reply

      +Sly Sparkane Like I said, its all slanted and there is no curve effect,
      its just a slanted camera. Try again Shilley!

    • Sly Sparkane // 4th Jun 2016 at 11:03 pm // Reply

      slanted yes… but obviously curved due to distortion from the end of the
      pier to the base at the beach… but I guess it take eyes and a straight
      thing to see that..

  6. whats goingon // 21st Oct 2015 at 8:00 pm // Reply

    the ball earth damn shills in distress

  7. Daniel Bagang (Danny) // 31st Oct 2015 at 1:44 am // Reply

    First of all, did you actually “test”? You have to be stupid to realize the
    higher you go up the more you can see, (possible only on a curved surface),
    the tops of ships show first instead of getting bigger from a dot, the fact
    that the higher the latitude, your shadow gets longer, (possible only on a
    curved surface), the stars spin in a circle directly above the earth’s
    axis, how gravity holds you to the ground and the “wall of ice” you call
    Antarctica that we have mapped most of. These are just the ones i can pull
    off from my head, only a small sum of the total proofs the earth is a
    globe. Also btw, the lighthouse photo you have, use a clear photo, it is
    clearly a cloudy/foggy day and this can bend light.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 14th Mar 2016 at 5:40 pm // Reply

      +Miller Exactly, the camera/scope was at most 6′ above the water. Isn’t
      this at all curious to you? I have no pre-conceived bias, whether the earth
      is round or flat it doesn’t matter, I just like to know the truth.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 14th Mar 2016 at 8:01 pm // Reply

      You obviously don’t understand how the sagitta is applied to find the drop
      in curvature. You are standing on a ball, so the distance you are looking
      one way, also extends the other way behind you to form the arc of a circle.
      Then you calculate the sagitta, which is the height of that arc, hence the
      drop in curvature forward and backward from your position. And since you
      are not interested and ‘know’ it is round, then the conversation should end
      here. Thanks for commenting.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 14th Mar 2016 at 8:36 pm // Reply

      +Miller Okay, enough said. Have a good week!

  8. Edward Campbell // 19th Nov 2015 at 2:41 am // Reply

    This all makes so much sense, dude! You know, you should just prove it once
    and for all by traveling the breadth of one time zone in the northern
    hemisphere and one in the southern. Yeah, it would take a lot of money and
    effort, but when this exceedingly simple experiment is done and recorded,
    showing how the southern time zone actually gets wider (as opposed to being
    equal to its northern equivalent) you will finally have irrefutable proof
    that not a single person can deny, and become the most important person of
    the century! Seriously, forget all this conjecture about what the Earth is
    supposed to look like and half-hearted algorithms that the elitist
    scientists refuse to support, it’s not necessary. Measure one time zone to
    the next above the Equator, then the same time zone under the equator and
    you will once and for all prove the entire scope of humanity wrong.
    Honestly, go do it. people have a right to know this stuff after all. You’d
    be doing us all an invaluable service. In the name of rationality, please
    let people finally see the truth!

    (I really want someone to do this. If you do too, copy the above paragraph
    and issue the challenge to any flatearthers you know. Let’s help these
    people find the “truth”)

  9. Project Pheonix // 7th Jan 2016 at 7:38 am // Reply

    Curvature is visible from about 30 miles away. I’ve tested this by using a
    standard Telescope and viewing Vancouver. The city was seemed to have sank.
    8 miles is nothing. You wouldn’t see curvature from 8 miles. The earth
    isn’t that small, dumbass. You would have to be damn-far away to see a
    noticeable curve. Even at 30 miles, Vancouver only sunk about 16-20 feet
    under the horison, which hid the bays and streetlights near the shore.

    • +Sans is a skeleton It depends on the telescope, due to how perspective
      really works , even on a flat earth things disappear under the horizon,
      confirmation bias in science make science not science, do keep up, know the
      others arguments before misrepresenting them with ignorance or
      intentionality .

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 25th Jan 2016 at 1:50 pm // Reply

      +Sans is a skeleton Learn about perspective sir, and also the correct
      measurements of the ball you think you live on.

    • +Project Pheonix Earth curve calculator Google it, 30 miles would drop
      486.15747939403445 ft

  10. Cutler Cycles // 27th Jan 2016 at 10:03 pm // Reply

    3 feet above the ground is not altitude. You would need to make sure your
    altitude is the same for each evaluation.

  11. Cutler Cycles // 27th Jan 2016 at 10:03 pm // Reply

    You can also clearly see the hotels are on a curved slope….lol Fail!

    • Ville Anderr (ReadYourBIble) // 4th Jun 2016 at 10:22 pm // Reply

      Nope. But between is low altitude and the Hotels that are really far away
      there is both waves HIGHER than him, but just a few inches of a wave,
      provided its close to the Hotels and far away from him, would obscure them
      as they do here. Curvature on the other hand would hide everything. GG! 🙂

    • Cutler Cycles // 5th Jun 2016 at 12:16 am // Reply

      +Victor Wallin completely wrong I saw exactly what is there a

    • Ville Anderr (ReadYourBIble) // 5th Jun 2016 at 12:21 am // Reply

      +Cutler Cycles Lying in the comments of a video where everyone sees there
      isn’t a curvature. You’re not a smart man..

  12. Prime Lemur // 22nd Feb 2016 at 3:27 am // Reply

    This video is a fail. Sorry, but at what elevation above water level is
    your camera in all of these shots?
    Just like every other “flat Earth proof of no curvature”, you have failed
    to account for your camera’s elevation above water level.
    Try it all again, this time taking carefully note of Camera Height (it
    consists of the height from ground to camera, PLUS the elevation above
    water level of the ground you are standing on).
    Then post THAT video!

    • Prime Lemur // 24th Mar 2016 at 12:09 pm // Reply

      +Gregory May
      “I think it is irrelevant because it wouldn’t change a lot. 5-7 feet is
      nothing compared to lack of 240 feet of curvature. What do you think?”

      First, thank you for taking a moment to respond.

      I think most flat Earthers have no idea just what they are testing, or how
      it must be done to be valid. ALL of these “no curvature” videos are
      failures … because most flat Earthers never, ever check anything for
      themselves. Coupled to the lack of understanding about the globe, it means
      they just don’t have the required wherewithal to test the Earth’s curvature.

      Small changes in camera elevation make very large differences to expected
      curvature … does that surprise you?

      The correct approach is available for all to see at the Earth Curvature

      There is a short form approximation that work’s for this type of
      observation … unfortunately, I’ve had this conversation so many times, I
      know it by heart now:

      D = 1.225 * SquareRoot of H (where D is distance to the horizon in miles
      and H is camera or eye elevation ^above water level^ in feet)
      C = 0.666 * (T – D)^2 (where C is expected curvature/curvature drop in
      feet, T is target distance in miles and D is from the first equation).

      These are suitable approximations for this test. Flat Earthers (quite
      conveniently) leave out the first equation altogether.

      You see, as far as the globe is concerned, the horizon isn’t a magical
      thing off in the distance. That is a flat Earth myth. The horizon is what
      actually blocks a distant object from view …

      I’ll repeat that: the horizon is the thing that blocks a distant object
      from view. If you prefer, the horizon is the “bulge” in the Earth’s
      curvature … I genuinely have no idea just what it is flat Earthers THINK
      would block a distant object from view, if the Earth is a globe … maybe
      you can tell me?

      Anyway, here is another interesting concept … from the formulas above, it
      can be discovered that the distance to the horizon depends on just one
      thing: camera (or eye) elevation.

      Have you put it together at this stage? I’ve spoken to you before, Gregory
      … and you seem like you have some God-given wits … If you change the
      camera elevation, you change the amount of curvature expected. This is
      precisely how flat Earth videos cheat … most by accident (although never
      checking how to test Earth’s curvature is NOT an excuse … this same
      information is literally plastered ALL OVER THE INTERNET). Some video
      authors cheat quite intentionally. Sad, but true.

      I DON’T want you to take my word for it … that’s how people get trapped
      in a flat Earth fishtank in the first place!

      I want you, Gregory, to be the very first flat Earther to … wait for it

      GO AND CHECK FOR YOURSELF! Lol. Seriously … take the plunge … in your
      search engine of choice, type: ” how do you visually test the curvature of
      the Earth”. I’ll wait right here while you do it!

    • Gregory May // 24th Mar 2016 at 7:39 pm // Reply

      +Prime Lemur
      Thanks. I will think about it. I’m not really a flat earther as I don’t
      believe in ANYTHING on internet anymore… Youtube is full of BS.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 24th Mar 2016 at 7:53 pm // Reply

      +Gregory May Yes, there is a lot of craziness on YT. The curvature issue is
      quite interesting though. That plus the horizon remaining at eye level,
      even when you ascend in a plane, are what got me interested. Filming is
      tough, I have actually seen this lighthouse from 30 miles away (400+ feet
      of curvature, NO WAY it would be visible), but it is difficult to film
      because the visibility never seems to cooperate, and at this point I’m not
      that motivated, people “believe” what they are going to believe no matter
      how much evidence you present.

    • Gregory May // 24th Mar 2016 at 8:02 pm // Reply

      +Curious Life of a Flat Earther
      Yes. I’m still waiting for someone to show a lightgouse (or something else)
      coming out from behind of curvature. That would be nice and would stop all
      the confusion.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 24th Mar 2016 at 8:55 pm // Reply

      +Gregory May Did you watch my gyroscopic eye video? After studying
      perspective, I came to the realization that there is no way the horizon
      could ever stay at eye level as you ascend, especially given the distances
      you can can as you ascend. The amount of curvature would be massive and
      visible. Check it out if you get a chance, and good luck, if you start down
      the path, it does rock your world 🙂 …. but in a good way.

  13. Matthew David // 28th Feb 2016 at 4:17 pm // Reply

    Get onto autocad. Draw the diameter width of the circle, measures view
    point to your distances taken here and raise the point of view that you are
    shooting from. It’s evident when you were showing short distances your were
    about 2 feet off the ground and when showing far distances you could see
    over people’s heads. Either you are lying or you set up your experiments
    incorrectly. Maybe get a PHD in physics and mathematics before you try to
    debunk 500 years of global scientific research.

    • Ville Anderr (ReadYourBIble) // 4th Jun 2016 at 10:23 pm // Reply

      You do realize a persons head on a flat surface gets lower and lower when
      travelling away from you, while the legs get higher? PERSPECTIVE. It’s like
      your globers haven’t even thought about how things ACTUALLY work once.

  14. Mike Barth // 18th Mar 2016 at 8:00 am // Reply

    Desperate trolls like squeaker alpha, and others whining about camera
    height.are cause for celebration . Is it 5 feet high or six feet high ? As
    if that makes all the difference ,and negates hundreds of feet in
    mathematically provable curvature .So globe heads, your telling me the
    photographs show a different view, or perspective than the photographer
    sees at the moment of picture taking ? Globers are dopes and duped .

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 18th Mar 2016 at 1:43 pm // Reply

      I know, thank you, obviously we can’t find the mythical curvature. I really
      want to get the 30 mile shot of this lighthouse, which I have seen but not
      yet filmed. but the weather has to be clear enough (never is) and it has to
      be at dusk so the light is on…frustrating when I make the drive only to
      be disappointed by cloudy foggy beach weather!!! Take care.

  15. A lot of those buildings in the distance looks to be partly below the
    horizon. Fairly easy to see, even though the video is low-res and looks
    like it was shot with a vaseline covered lens.

    • Curious Life of a Flat Earther // 10th Jun 2016 at 9:47 pm // Reply

      yeah it’s an old video shot with my telescope and a camera. I have since
      seen distances much further than this I’ve just never got around to making
      a video of it. Every time I drag my équipement somewhere the conditions are

    • Mathias Kp // 27th Jun 2016 at 9:42 pm // Reply

      Yes it can be difficult to get the conditions right many days when going
      out to the sea one can only see a couple of miles But one day I got lucky
      and made a series of observations from 7 different distances/heights. The
      video is called “Turning Torso (190m tall) – seen from 25km – 50km”.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


Share This