>>2317942 (pb)
Over 20 miles, the earth will curve downward 160 total inches. (8 inches per mile)
Or 13.33 feet.
That image is 770x467
770 per 20 miles = 77 per 2 miles.
2 miles = 10560 feet.
So 77 pixels for 10560 feet.
10560 / 77 = 137.14
That means each pixel represents 137.14 feet.
The 13.33 feet of curvature you'd see over 20 miles is literally 1/10th of a pixel.
Fuck you.
Fuck off.
The earth is round.
Oops, just realized… they're 20 miles high… I guess…
Still, assume 200 miles across… the math still works. 1 pixel represents the ENTIRE drop you'd see.
Earth curves downward at 8" per mile.
6 miles of canal = 8" * 6 = 48 inches.
That's 4 feet.
How big was the boat? The expected curvature would not even be enough to hide the flag staff…
Another mathematical error.
At an altitude of 100 feet, you extend your vision of the horizon at 1 mile per 8 inches of height.
100 feet = 1200 inches.
1200 inches divided by 8 = 150
That's 150 miles. Not 13 miles.
Fucking learn to math!
Anyone that can fap to that boyish no-titty "girl" is probably a pedo, or a fag.
Nope, it's 8" per mile, period.
If you square the distance, that means the earth would curve inwards on itself like a conch shell… spiraling inward more and more tightly as you go. It's simple geometry.
A sphere has a constant rate of change across the arc. It's not multiplicative, it's additive.
The squared function is a "hack" done by civil engineers.
Sauce (as if you care about any facts): https://embracetheball.blogspot.com/2016/12/eight-inches-per-mile-squared.html
MathTeacherAnon here. :)
Unlike the flat earth biblefags that NEED to believe in flat earth to validate their biblefaggotry, I actually have to operate in the realm of facts and logic, using evidence and sources that I can cite, with data that can be replicated.
I'm not even allowed to use teaching strategies without being able to cite a scientific peer-reviewed study that validates that the teaching strategy works.
https://www.davidsenesac.com/Information/line_of_sight.html
There… Sauce on the 8" per mile thing.
See, I don't buy that it was a SAM of any kind… and it wasn't targeting AF1… because Subs don't have SAMs… Subs (boomers) have ICBMs fired from vertical launch tubes, and fast attack subs have torpedo tube launched harpoon anti-ship missiles, and SOME have vertical launch tubes for Tomahawk cruise missiles.
It looked like a vertical launch, so that means Tomahawk or ICBM. Tomahawks are "pop up, then surface skim" missiles. They pop out, eject from a canister, and while they are still going upward, they deploy wings and fire up a jet propulsion engine that has no fire behind it.
So that means that launch, if from a sub, HAD to have been an ICBM… from a boomer… probably a Trident.
And again, it was NOT targeting AF1, because it wasn't a fricking SAM… no way you could "lock on" to an airplane with it, etc… no way you could even have it detonate the nukes on the upward flight… it's still in its main canister… the MIRVs would not be deployed yet, etc…
So this whole notion that it was a targeted attack on AF1 while POTUS was returning to the US… is just stupid and illogical.
You can stop being cryptic and just say what you mean.
My own next step says that it must have been an ICBM launch… why? Because the missile itself is visible and slow moving. A SAM launch is FAST… the missiles are small and light, and don't require much propulsion to reach their targets.
This was a relatively slow-moving launch.
See attached video to see a SAM launch of an SA6 (Russian SAM).
Yup, I concur that it was someone else.
It's not like enemy subs have never been in our territorial waters, right? :) I mean, we know for a FACT that the Russians have been within spitting distance of our various ports… ballsy moves, but still, they did it often.
My conclusion is this.
Not a SAM (too slow)
Not a cruise missile (it went up too far with too long of a burn)
ICBM launch very likely.
Not USA missile.
Possible Chinese? The Russians aren't that stupid or reckless.
Possible rogue sub from another nation…
The only way F16s intercepted it is if it was an ICBM or even Short range tactical nuke… it would be moving slow enough to intercept with our own missiles, and big enough to get a radar lock on it.
Brings back memories of the possibility of AS-6 Kingfish being launched at our navy ships by TU-16s and TU-22s, with the F-14 platform that was specifically designed to shoot down those cruise missiles with their Phoenix missiles.