>>21244149>No, all you have to do is know if it was high, or low tide, and how much water had been moved.Huh?
all I have to do for what?
>Distance stays the same, but the amount of water that could be in the way would be down by thousands of feet,what? you're claiming the tide alters the expected obstruction based on curvature? And that it might be "THOUSANDS" of feet of difference?
you've never been on a boat have you?
You know there are sometimes 3 tides a day in every port in the world; the tide swells are experienced by like a billion people every day. You've probably been to a beach all day and watched the tide go in or out. Has it ever traveled THOUSANDS of feet?
Some new--if insanely incompetent--cope though, points for originality.
>and it looks like it's partially obstructed by the water at the bottomno that doesn't actually happen, it's a refractive effect called 'sinking' and the an optical illusion called 'crushing'.
Globe math predicts it should obscured by 5,400 feet of curvature drop at that distance. This is shown in the video. You're claiming the TIDE is responsible for this observation somehow? Could you draw it out for me?
