78. From Anchorage at a height of 102 feet Mount Foraker should not be visible on a spherical Earth
“From Anchorage, Alaska at an elevation of 102 feet, on clear days Mount Foraker can be seen with the naked eye 120 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Mount Foraker’s 17,400 summit should be leaning back away from the observer covered by 7,719 feet of curved Earth. In reality, however, the entire mountain can be quite easily seen standing straight from base to summit.”
Dubay can't do trigonometry. Mount Foraker is definitely visible from Anchorage on a spherical Earth.
Dubay's miscalculation occurs because he does not understand that the height of the observer makes a huge difference to the visibility of objects beyond the horizon.
Using the correct calculation, with an observer at 102 feet, and at a distance if 130 miles (not 120 as Dubay states), the obscured height of Mt Foraker is 9231 feet. This will leave 8169 feet of the mountain visible.
Looking at the following profile of Mt Foraker you can clearly see that the visible part of the mountain in Dubay's image is only the upper part.
This result above ignores refraction, and I have not needed it to show that Dubay's "proof" proves nothing, but it should be noted that Dubay's image certainly looks like refraction is at play because the mountain seems to be hanging above the ground.
Also note that the photo that Dubay uses is not evidence as he is trying to imply. It is obviously taken from an altitude greater than 102 feet. In fact he simply found the image on the Internet and copied it.
See: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ap0013/4958498645/
This is how I believe Dubay operates. He finds an image on the Internet, looks up the distance, does his flawed calculation and simply makes up an elevation.
Once again Dubay shows that he cannot be trusted.
< Prev 71-80 Next >
Dubay can't do trigonometry. Mount Foraker is definitely visible from Anchorage on a spherical Earth.
Dubay's miscalculation occurs because he does not understand that the height of the observer makes a huge difference to the visibility of objects beyond the horizon.
Using the correct calculation, with an observer at 102 feet, and at a distance if 130 miles (not 120 as Dubay states), the obscured height of Mt Foraker is 9231 feet. This will leave 8169 feet of the mountain visible.
Looking at the following profile of Mt Foraker you can clearly see that the visible part of the mountain in Dubay's image is only the upper part.
 |
| Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Foraker |
This result above ignores refraction, and I have not needed it to show that Dubay's "proof" proves nothing, but it should be noted that Dubay's image certainly looks like refraction is at play because the mountain seems to be hanging above the ground.
Also note that the photo that Dubay uses is not evidence as he is trying to imply. It is obviously taken from an altitude greater than 102 feet. In fact he simply found the image on the Internet and copied it.
See: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ap0013/4958498645/
This is how I believe Dubay operates. He finds an image on the Internet, looks up the distance, does his flawed calculation and simply makes up an elevation.
Once again Dubay shows that he cannot be trusted.
< Prev 71-80 Next >
Comments
Post a Comment