Eric Dubay does not understand perspective

Dubay often tries to invoke "The law of perspective" to explain why objects appear to disappear below the horizon.  Invariably his "proofs" just show that he really does not understand how perspective operates.

He essentially relies on the fact that as things become more distant it is harder to see the detail of those objects and consequently easier for Dubay to make up some nonsense about what is being observed.








102. The Pole Star approaching the horizon as you travel south can be explained by perspective
"Some heliocentrists have tried to suggest that the Pole Star’s gradual declination overhead as an observer travels southwards is proof of a globular Earth. Far from it, the declination of the Pole Star or any other object is simply a result of the Law of Perspective on plane (flat) surfaces. The Law of Perspective dictates that the angle and height at which an object is seen diminishes the farther one recedes from the object, until at a certain point the line of sight and the seemingly uprising surface of the Earth converges to a vanishing point (i.e. the horizon line) beyond which the object is invisible. In the ball-Earth model the horizon is claimed to be the curvature of the Earth, whereas in reality, the horizon is known to be simply the vanishing line of perspective based on the strength of your eyes, instruments, weather and altitude."
125. Sunbeams prove that the Sun is relatively close, just above the clouds
"Another proof the Sun is not millions of miles away is found by tracing the angle of sun-rays back to their source above the clouds. There are thousands of pictures showing how sunlight comes down through cloud-cover at a variance of converging angles. The area of convergence is of course the Sun, and is clearly NOT millions of miles away, but rather relatively close to Earth just above the clouds."
138. Perspective is responsible for objects seeming to drop over the horizon
"Another favorite “proof’ of ball-Earthers is the appearance from an observer on shore of ships’ hulls being obfuscated by the water and disappearing from view when sailing away towards the horizon. Their claim is that ships’ hulls disappear before their mast-heads because the ship is beginning its declination around the convex curvature of the ball-Earth. Once again, however, their hasty conclusion is drawn from a faulty premise, namely that only on a ball-Earth could this phenomenon occur. The fact of the matter is that the Law of Perspective on plane surfaces dictates and necessitates the exact same occurrence. For example a girl wearing a dress walking away towards the horizon will appear to sink into the Earth the farther away she walks. Her feet will disappear from view first and the distance between the ground and the bottom of her dress will gradually diminish until after about half a mile it seems like her dress is touching the ground as she walks on invisible legs. Such is the case on plane surfaces, the lowest parts of objects receding from a given point of observation necessarily disappear before the highest."
139. Perspective is responsible for ships disappearing over the horizon
"Not only is the disappearance of ship’s hulls explained by the Law of Perspective on flat surfaces, it is proven undeniably true with the aid of a good telescope. If you watch a ship sailing away into the horizon with the naked eye until its hull has completely disappeared from view under the supposed “curvature of the Earth,” then look through a telescope, you will notice the entire ship quickly zooms back into view, hull and all, proving that the disappearance was caused by the Law of Perspective, not by a wall of curved water! This also proves that the horizon is simply the vanishing line of perspective from your point of view, NOT the alleged “curvature” of Earth."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

127. Straight reflections of sunlight and moonlight are impossible on a spherical Earth

Debunking Eric Dubay's 200 proofs the earth is not a spinning ball

18. The Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments failed to detect any significant change in the speed of light caused by the motion of the earth, which proves that the earth is stationary