gerrydandridge Posted April 9, 2016 Author Share Posted April 9, 2016 I opened my postbox this morning to find the courier, I turn to page 3 and I find this....Also in IOM today..http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/why-this-photograph-isn-t-fake-1-7840146 91 miles = over 5,500ft of curvature by my calculations, I thought Snaefell was only 2000ft above sea level, some atmospheric refraction going on here. In the article they talk of lens effects that bring the background in, making it appear closer, but not one mentions of the curvature of the earth, wouldn't a journalist worth his salt at least think, "how the hell is this even possible on a ball shaped Earth". It is a nice image though, and I find it hard to beleive light can bend so much over that didtance and give such a clear crisp image with no signs of distortion. "Why this photograph isn’t fake" is the title of the article.. Oh and on a side note, the photographer's name is "Stephen Cheatley"....just an observation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llap Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 Is this thread a wind up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted April 9, 2016 Author Share Posted April 9, 2016 No, I had slightly different thoughts on the subject last year to what I have now, but at the time it was an honest question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 We've already looked at very similar photos earlier in this thread they are entirely consistent with most of Snaefell etc being under the horizon. There will be some atmospheric refraction but nothing unusual. As Snaefell and the Blackpool tower seem to be the same relative height you could probably make an estimate what height above sea level the photo was taken - Gerry care to give it a try. Also Gerry, remember if both points are above see level the distance seen is greater than your single point calculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManxTaxPayer Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 Is this thread a wind up? Yeah, it's just Chinahand and his sockpuppet arguing with him/herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 Hee hee, I'm back on the Island with a telephoto lens.So you go to Douglas head with a big pair of binoculars or a really big lens - I had an 400mm and it was only just up to it.You start at the top and faint-and-distant you can see the West of Duddon Sands Wind Farm:You then start to climb down the slope - careful it is bit steep and the grass doesn't give the best grip.About half way down the view has changed - as you drop lower you are not able to see as far over the horizon - you can still see the top of the turbines, but more and more of the column isn't visible:A bit further down even more of the column isn't visible with only the tops and the turbine blades when they are higher than the top of the column being visible.It is a wonderful sight seeing the turbine blades spinning around, but only being visible for the top half of their rotation.I'm off to Peel now to see what the Mull of Galloway Lighthouse looks like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweek Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 And who says there's f**k all to do for tourists on the island? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted April 17, 2016 Author Share Posted April 17, 2016 Its hard to argue that the curve of the Earth is not responsible for these photos....BTW Chinahand, how far above sea level were you when you took the last image? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 these bhoys would disagree with you i think gerry!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 Its hard to argue that the curve of the Earth is not responsible for these photos....BTW Chinahand, how far above sea level were you when you took the last image? I was still quite high up - about the same height as the lighthouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 Hee hee, I'm back on the Island with a telephoto lens. So you go to Douglas head with a big pair of binoculars or a really big lens - I had an 400mm and it was only just up to it. You start at the top and faint and distance you can see the West of Duddon Sands Wind Farm: 00890058c.jpg You then start to climb down the slope - careful it is bit steep and the grass doesn't give the best grip. About half way down the view has changed - as you drop lower you are not able to see as far over the horizon - you can still see the top of the turbines, but more and more of the column isn't visible: 00890048a.jpg A bit further down even more of the column isn't visible with only the tops and the turbine blades when they are higher than the top of the column being visible. 00890033b.jpg It is a wonderful sight seeing the turbine blades spinning around, but only being visible for the top half of their rotation. I'm off to Peel now to see what the Mull of Galloway Lighthouse looks like! Just out of curiosity, were you down The Sound with your camera yesterday ? ( that's if you were here at all and not just speaking figuratively.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 Nah it wasn't me at the sound yesterday - though I was up Peel Hill this afternoon, but it was rather deserted and the view to the Mull of Galloway was really too hazy for a good photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 Nah it wasn't me at the sound yesterday - though I was up Peel Hill this afternoon, but it was rather deserted and the view to the Mull of Galloway was really too hazy for a good photo. We were down The Sound and there was a "stranger" down there with a massive lens on his camera. Must have been a tourist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 And who says there's f**k all to do for tourists on the island? You'll look forward to looking back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 We've already looked at very similar photos earlier in this thread they are entirely consistent with most of Snaefell etc being under the horizon. If anything, the photo supports the curvature of the Earth. Snaefell appears the same height as Blackpool Tower when in fact at is four times higher - the effect of most of the Island being below the curve of the horizon. Also you cannot see the Island anything like that at sea level in Blackpool. You have to travel a further 30 odd miles away, inland to Winter Hill which is 1500 feet above seal level. All consistent with the curved surface of the Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.