The Law of Diminishing Perspective

Note: There is no horizon that blocks the end of this very long straight tunnel. But, we can’t visually acquire the end through the law of diminishing perspective. This is known as vanishing point.

by John McGlone

Having studied Geocentricity and the form of the earth for about two years now, I think I am finally at peace about what I am understanding.  Here are some earlier blogs I posted on this issue:  1.  The Scriptural Foundation of Geocentricity  2. The Flat Earth Controversy.  I thought I would begin to document some very important points that bring about a doubt on what has been taught to us by the ‘science’ of this world about Heliocentricity (Orbital Solar System) and the Globe of the Earth.  Generally, we are instructed from the very beginnings of our experiences on the Universe, it’s origins, and characteristics.  So, in this point paper I would like to discuss the law of linear perspective which has much to say about what and how we are seeing the world and universe around us.

Firstly, I would like to define said law of linear perspective.   noun 1.  a mathematical system for representing three-dimensional objects and space on a two-dimensional surface by means of intersecting lines that are drawn vertically and horizontally and that radiate from one point(one-point perspective) two points (two-point perspective) or several points on a horizon line as perceived by a viewer imagined in an arbitrarily fixed position.

Secondly, I’d like to recognize that everything we see with our eyes are mathematically and logically processed by the retina passing into the brain to continue the process of understanding the world we are seeing around us.

Here is an example I’d like to start with on our understanding of the laws of perspective in what is a very real life situation.  We will be using the well known, scientific, and mathematically proven formula for the earth’s roundness based on the same ‘scientifically’ proven circumference of the planet of ~25,000 statute miles.  That formula is:  Distance to Horizon² X 8″/12 = rise/fall of the arc of the horizon.

1.Imagine you are flying a plane at 36,000 feet.  An aerial observer can see 232.6 miles in one direction. But, from the cockpit one can observe in opposing directions gaining a total observation of 465.2 miles. For reference, here is an altitude horizon calculator for distance.

Horizon Distance Calculator

465² X 8/12 = Feet of Rise and Fall that we should see on the globe.  Following the well known curvature formula that is mathematically proven:  465 X 465 X 8/12 = 144,150 feet of total rise and decline of the arc across that 180 degree observation. Keep in mind we are flying at 36,000 feet.  Can you imagine seeing such an interesting and different sight?  For 90 degrees of the view from left to center we should see an amazing 72,075 feet of rise, then the same fall from center view to the right horizon on our starboard wing.  However, since our childhoods we have all been taught that the earth is so large the curvature of the earth is minuscule from what we actually experience in day to day life.

This perplexing mathematical formula which is supposed to help us calculate the curve of the earth, does exactly the opposite when a person employs it without accepting the presupposition of a globe earth to distort their sight.  

Now with all the aforesaid information in mind, why don’t we see the curvature that the globe formula demands if it were true?  As the below picture does not show, we should see a mountain of water climbing up to over twice the altitude of this plane to a majestic height of 72,075 feet above the median sea level!

A great photo of someone trying to disprove the flatness of the earth, yet helping the cause immensely.

I served 21 years in the U.S. Navy sailing the world’s oceans and looking at that horizon perspective for many tens of thousands of long hours standing watch.  I was a lookout, helmsman, and navigator for most all of those years.  I never questioned the rotundity of the earth as I had been taught since grade school.  I had these ideas reinforced in my navigational training as well.  I worked with mostly Mercator projection charts to safely transit the Atlantic, Caribbean, Mediterranean, Indian, Persian, Adriatic, and Pacific oceans and seas.  One of the often used arguments that prevented me from believing this flat earth ‘theory’ was the fact that we could watch ships, lighthouses, and landmarks pass over the visual horizon and out of sight.  This really does seem to prove the globe model very simply in anyone’s mind.  But, the same lines of perspective that causes telephone poles, cars, train tracks and the like to diminish to vanishing point is not roundness, but simple ocular vanishing point.  The picture at the top of this blog post is a perfect example of a straight subway train track and tunnel not going over the horizon, but simply vanishing by ocular weakness.  Put a telescope to this tunnel or a lighthouse or a ship at vanishing point you will see they did not actually travel over the horizon at all!  You can see this demonstrated in these very cool videos:

Objects Over the Curvature of the Earth

More Video Evidence on Curvature Myth

With enough distance everything we see with our naked eye diminishes to vanishing point.  This includes sun, moon, stars, etc. that approach our visual horizon and then diminish to ocular non existence.   The assumption that the world is spinning and therefore that is why we see the heavenly bodies racing about is just that, an assumption of a theory.  ‘Well, what about NASA, ISS, astronauts on the moon, etc?’, you the dear reader may ask.  For now could we just stick to what we are seeing with our eyes and minds here in front of us?  The same ‘science’ that brought you Darwin evolution, and Big Bang Theory is the same God rejecting, Bible hating philosophies that tell us that Heliocentric Theory and the shape, orbits, spinning, and travels of planet earth are true according to them.

When looking at telephone poles that are diminishing to the horizon, we don’t assume that they are going on the other side of the curve of the globe do we?  Here is a great video from Brian Mullins on Perspective.


What do star trails have to do with flat earth?  Well again perspective is all we are talking about.  Many misunderstandings are created by the fact that most all of us start with the assumption we are living on a globe versus living on a circle as the Bible describes.  Now since we see star trails at the equator are diverging from each other, anyone must ask themselves what is causing these opposing whirlpools of diverging lights?  Shouldn’t the epicenters be at opposing axis’s?  If that is the case how can you see both at the same time? Isn’t this the same effect of seeing the Southern Cross and Polaris at the same time?Don’t the globalists deny anyone can see this phenomenon because of curvature?  How is this possible according to the roundness everyone promotes in the ‘scientific’ community?

Here is a great video which gives some great understandings of perspectives in regards to star trails.
Flat Earth Star Trails Explained




Equatorial star movements





10 Comments to The Law of Diminishing Perspective

  1. Zane Lyons says:

    “we see with our eyes are mathematically and logically processed by the retina passing into the brain to continue the process of understanding the”

    The retina is only for sensing, it doesn’t process what we see. The light is converted to neural signals at the retina, sent through the optic nerve, through the optic chiasm, and into the Occipital lobes

    “We will be using the well known, scientific, and mathematically proven formula for the earth’s roundness based on the same ‘scientifically’ proven circumference of the planet of ~25,000 statute miles by Eratosthenes in 195 BC. That formula is: Distance to Horizon Squared X 8″/12 = rise/fall of the arc of the horizon.”

    Eratosthenes did not use that formula for that purpose.

    Also, after 21 years in the navy, I assume you used GPS at least once.

    • johnmcglone says:

      Zane, thanks for your comment. I suppose with all the rods and cones involved in sensory perceptions of the retina, that to say that it is not processed is deny the obvious. Every step of the way is a process including the end game of the brain receiving the images to final processing.
      In regards to Eratosthenes primitive formulations, I did not word this very well. Note the key word based which cojoins the two thoughts of the modern geometric formulations vs. Eratosthenes formula. I quote, “That formula is: Distance to Horizon Squared X 8″/12 = rise/fall of the arc of the horizon.” [meaning the modern calculation not Eratosthenes].
      Check this image with the formulas and geometric calculation of curvature rates. Thank you.

  2. Mordecai says:

    You’re a flat-earther too!? That really puts the icing on the cake. You really are getting a LOT of misinformation from a LOT of amateur, info-misconstruing sources.

    So, I suppose you think the planet is 6000 years old also?

    • johnmcglone says:

      How long did you spend reading the three blogs I’ve done on this? What was the title and main point of the oldest one?

  3. Mordecai says:

    Seriously, your webpage gets better and better the more I look at it. I am just boggled by your utter-stupidity. It’s almost like watching those videos where guys get repetitively hit in the balls by doing stupid stunts. It hurts every time to watch it happen, but you just can’t turn your head away from the TV screen.

    • johnmcglone says:

      uh huh, why you still here.

      • Mordecai says:

        ‘Cause it’s just so much fun to point out just how ridiculous your beliefs are.

        Hopefully, when other people see your page, they’ll look in the comment section to see our fun, little discussions.

        They’ll see what I point out about your beliefs that doesn’t make any sense. Then, they’ll see you say a bunch of nonsense with no real truth to it. After they see what we both have to say, they’ll be more persuaded to actually research the truth rather than accept answers that you give which, more or less, boil down to “because the Bible says so”.

        Isn’t this just so fun!? I’m having a blast!

  4. Peter Ericsson says:

    Great presentation!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *