Skyline Skepticism: The Lake Michigan Mirage

[lionchrist]

it's easy. Show us a live satellite broadcast so we can see the earth spinning. That would make the whole debate superfluous.

[jaythomas]

So if multiple people take this picture on multiple days with multiple weather conditions is it still a mirage

[pianojonb]

So how did they charter a boat and video the entire trip 50 miles and the city didn't invert nor was it a mirage.

[ridwanmujahid_.]

Tom, I feel so bad for you. Just reading some of these comments gave me a headache, I can't imagine how discouraging it would be to get on your channel. Sometimes it doesn't help to try to explain stuff to certain people. I certainly found this extremely interesting and appreciate your very informative explanation!

[GregoryBaldi]

Refraction will magnify, and push your image down. A mirage will mirror and flip. Technically you wouldnt even be able to see the skyline with 2k of the curve.

[victorneely]

Even with our own eyes you can see Chicago and still they will try and explain it away with experiments that are always convoluted. The GREAT experiment that you are ignoring is the photographer that took the picture of Chicago's skyline.
Water NEVER curves. Water ALWAYS seeks its level. You can do these experiments at home.

[mickyd]

Your better off just forgetting flat earth & globe theory for a minute & be really, really honest with yourself. Look at the picture & ask yourself with your own senses, am I really seeing this or not.
For me weather the earth is flat or a globe if i had taken this picture & could see this that clearly from where I was standing, I'd trust my own senses & say that's not a mirage. To me it's blatantly obviously. For any person to convince someone they're not seeing this from a picture they've taken is quite worrying in itself.

[huddyhowell]

lol. these guys are just digging themselves a deeper hole.

[quanah]

Using a flat surface as the example at 3:48 mmmmk

[jarrettknipp]

Give me a break using a table, you’re just showing how refraction breaks off the bottom half of a picture. You’re still seeing the tops of the buildings with no refraction, #TheEarthIsFlat

[joehova]

Lmfao this is hilarious. Check out Rob Skiba on lake Michigan, it's no mirage amigos lol

[lambisi]

This got me thinking... Water curves on the globe, stays level in pools and lakes. A mile wide lake has an 8 inch curve. If you built a mile long "level" swimming pool, will the water be 4 inches low on both ends.??

[brendanch]

"Wherever you think the image is, is not where it actually is." I feel in my mind that's more spooky to me than the earth being flat. what I literally see isn't true hmmmm. I truly feel like I'm in a simulation 😂

[TheKonnoisseur]

That flat experiment was a joke you can see the buildings because you’re staring at the buildings.

[FOUNDEDEARTHBROTHERS]

If the illustration at 3:13 were correct you would be looking up to see the buildings instead of eye level which is always the case.

[hydragirium]

I will prove here by numbers what Professor of Optical Physics said between 2:56 and 3:16. Mirage (refraction of light) is an incredible optical phenomenon, and it can be calculated, through this, C2 = kS² / 2R, and through this, S = √ (C / 0, 0000686). The first equation provide the height or distance at which the refraction can be seen. And the second equation is the famous equation for calculating terrestrial curvature, BUT, the terrestrial curvature equation does not consider the refraction of light. Knowing this, we can calculate the distances (Chicago and Lake Michigan, into sea) and the distance that the refraction propagates, in this case, the Chicago mirage.

Michigan's height in relation to sea level is 304, 8 meters (0, 3048 km).
Chicago's height in relation to sea level is 182 meters (0, 182 km).

Using this here: S = √ (C / 0, 0000686), we can calculate the distances that Michigan and Chicago can be seen with the naked eye without the effect of light refraction.

* Note: The land curvature equation above is already converted into kilometers, as well as the distance between Lake Michigan and Chicago is 65 miles (104, 60 km).

The distance at which Michigan, located at 304, 8 meters (0, 3048 km) high in relation to sea level, can be seen without refraction effect, is:

S = √ (C / 0, 0000686) →
S = √ (0, 3048 / 0, 0000686) →
S = √ (4443, 148688) →
S = 66, 65 km (41, 41439 miles).

The distance at which Chicago, located 182 meters (0, 182 km) high in relation to sea level, can be seen without refraction is:

S = √ (C / 0, 0000686) →
S = √ (0, 182 / 0, 0000686) →
S = √ (2653, 061224) →
S = 51, 50 km (32, 00 miles).

Now we are going to use the refraction equation, C2 = kS² / 2R
(This is what ALL curvature calculators do not take into account).

* Explaining the equation: The letter (k), which is equal to 0, 125, and can be obtained by following this here:
k = 1 / r / 1 / R → R / r, where (r) is the radius generated of the curve by refraction, and this describes an arc of radius circumference (r), and in successive experiments it has been proven that the value of this radius (r) is approximately 8 times the radius of the Earth, that is, r ~ 8R (R / r → 6371 / 8x6371 → 0.125).

Chicago can be seen without refraction at 51, 50 km (32, 00 miles), BUT, the observable reality takes into account the refraction of light, so we have for Chicago a height (C2) of refraction:

C2 = kS² / 2R →
C2 = 0, 125 x (51, 50) ² / 2 x 6731 →
C2 = 0, 125 x 2652, 25 / 12742 →
C2 = 26, 01 meters or 0, 02601 km (0, 0161618 miles).

Depending on the weather conditions of the day and time of observation, Chicago has a refraction of 26, 01 meters (0, 0161618 miles) high above 51, 50 km (32, 00 miles) into the sea. Knowing this, let's see how many kilometers a height of 26, 01 meters can be seen?

S = √ (C / 0, 0000686) →
S = √ (0, 02601 / 0, 0000686) →
S = √ (379, 154518) →
S = 19, 47 km (12, 09809 miles).

Conclusion, Chicago disappears on the horizon at 51, 50 km (32, 00 miles), BUT, the refraction of light "projects Chicago" plus 19, 47 km (12, 09809 miles) INTO the sea, totaling 70, 97 km (44, 098714 miles). However, those on Lake Michigan have a horizon line of 66, 65 km (41, 41439 miles), so the distance for those on Lake Michigan to the refraction of Chicago is:

1 - Chicago plus refraction into the sea = 70, 97 km (44, 098714 miles), MINUS 104, 60 km (65 miles), is equal to 33, 63 km (20, 896713), which is the distance that Lake Michigan fades away.

2 - The horizon line of the Lake Michigan into the sea = 66, 65 km (41, 41439 miles), MINUS 104, 60 km (65 miles), is equal to 37, 95 km (23, 581037 miles), which is distance to refraction of Chicago (Chicago mirage).

3 - Result, 37, 95 km minus 33, 63 km, is equal to 4, 32 kilometers INTO the refraction of Chicago (Chigaco mirage), OR, 70, 97 km MINUS 66, 65 km, is equal to 4, 32 kilometers INTO the refraction of Chicago (Chigaco mirage). And because of that number (4, 32 km) we can see Chicago at ground level.

* Result in miles, 23, 581037 minus 20, 896713, is equal to 2, 684324 miles INTO the refraction of Chicago (Chicago mirage), OR, 44, 098714 miles MINUS 41, 41439 miles, is equal to 2, 684324 miles INTO the refraction of Chicago (Chigaco mirage). And because of that number (2, 684324 miles) we can see Chicago at ground level.

EARTH IS NOT FLAT... WE ARE IN THE 21st CENTURY, WAKE UP, FLAT EARTHERS!

[ButtonsNBlunts]

Hey guys! Check it out! I just took a super dope image of a city right in front of me while the 20ft tall waves weren't blocking it! Scientists... Its not in front of you, its an upside down mirage because of the water in the air!

[null_st]

The IQ cap for this comment section is stuck around 80 🤣🤣

[Necile]

I've sat on the beach in New Buffalo, Michigan hundreds of times. All I could ever see was the top of the Sears Tower. I will believe my own eyes, thank you very much.

[globe_atheist]

Your explanation is a cover up. That's no mirage