"Flat Earth" photo, and why it's so hard to debunk pseudoscience

[Rattlerjake]

[QUOTE=Toolmaker51;193688]About all I'm willing to contribute at 04:00 CST......
a] https://www.google.com/search?q=why+...client=gws-wiz

b] Spare 1.02 seconds, and review any quantity of results. Plenty to chose from, a nice round 299,000,000 items...first was Huygens in 1653 via phases of Venus.
https://www.google.com/search?client...e+from+the+sun. With quill pen and paper, and early slide rule likely. Estimates are acceptable in realm of figuratively infinite calculations. That subsequent researchers have used different bodies or methods only reinforces the entirety, ever narrowing range of error(s).

c] re Flat Earth;
Mt. Everest @ 8,848 meters (29,029 ft) ~ 5.50 miles
+ Marianas Trench @ 11,034 meters (36,201 feet) ~ 7.0 miles
rather assures a minimum 19,882 meters (65,230 ft) ~ 12.35 miles 'thickness', minimum.
What remains unclear, how large is the drain plug?
Convention says about 2412.17 meters (41785656 ft) ~7913.95 miles, from two points roughly equatorial in latitudinal position and mere 6018947 meters or 3740 mi that is 19°8'10" apart (about 1.28 time zone which are 15° each.)



Your a] reply is worthless. Maybe you should go back and 1) actually read what I stated, and 2) read what you provided. What you provided doesn't address taking a closeup photo showing the actual ISS in detail, all it does it address taking a picture of a dot traveling cross the sky.

Your reply c] just shows a blatant ignorance of the term "flat earth". The term "flat earth" simply means the earth is a horizontal plane. Mountains and oceanic trenches are nothing more than forms of relief on that plane, no different than a "relief map".

Your reply b] also shows your complete ignorance of understanding of astronomy and mathematics between 1600s and present day. 1) Nowhere is there any reference to what the distance is that he calculated, same goes for the majority of those early "astronomers, and 2) it states: "However, because Huygens' method was partly guesswork and not completely scientifically grounded ..."