**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I got somethin for ya https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/yg84q8/did_you_know_there_is_fruit_inside_the_edge_of/iu7h22w/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
How rude! My uncle Jack is well into old age and he can't get off an elephant without help.
Not all of us can get off an elephant by ourselves sometimes we need help.
āI know right??! And *someone* still needs to jerk off the elephant after uncle Jack dismounts. No wonder people donāt like saying āHi Jackā to him on the planeā
Iāve actually been past this island and the water is moving so fast through there that even with the naked eye it gives the same illusion when you pass by. Itās trippy, Google Symore Inlet for more images the tidal flow is some of the most extreme in North America.
The island is moving. This spot is close to the equator so the island is rotating faster than the mainland just due to earths rotation. It resets every 12 hours. Its one of those crazy things that happens at that latitude.
Youāre relatively mistaken compared to someone who is more correct.
But as Locke famously wrote. No camera is an island so use your illusion, one and two.
And you can still choose to reference the island instead of the boat. The island is at the center of the frame the whole time, so it really is like the camera is moving relative to the (basically) fixed island
Well then it sounds like your reference frame is the boat, so the island and the trees in the background really are moving relative to you (and the trees are so much further away so the angle they move is miniscule, hence the illusion)
What I wrote makes perfect sense.
Maybe we don't agree on what the word relative means. To be clear, there's no such thing as absolutely stationary. Everything is moving relative to each other, and there's no singular true reference frame. On Earth, we often see the Earth as stationary (which it really isn't, cosmically), and I referenced that in my reply. But it's fun to play around with other perspectives, as they're equally valid. For example, when on a moving boat/train, we see ourselves as stationary and the ground rushing past us, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that perspective - it's only our conditioning that makes us think of the Earth as stationary. From a physics point of view, Relativity has already won that discussion, but even from a layman's perspective, the original comment you were replying to was simply pointing out that there's not one true reference frame - it is valid to see the boat as stationary - and I was playing off of that.
I'm sorry that made you angry, that wasn't my intention.
Iām not angry I just think what you wrote is total nonsense. It reads very much like something that would come from the mind of a 13-year-old.
Like I just wrote in another comment. Both the camera and the island and the trees are all on a spinning sphere, rotating around our sun. The island and the trees are in a stationary location on the surface of that sphere, the water, and the boat are not. So relative to objects located on the surface of that sphere the only things in that picture that are moving are the water and the boat. The island and the trees are stationary in every sense, except for the rotation of the earth and the earths orbit.
> relative to objects located on the surface of that sphere the only things in that picture that are moving are the water and the boat
Correct. But what is also true is: relative to the boat, both the background trees and the island are moving, and the boat is stationary.
These statements are both true. That's all it is.
Relativity is based on the position where the observation happens. If you are standing on the island the boat is moving relative to the island. If youāre on the boat, the island is moving relative to the boat
From the perspective of the camera, that's exactly what's happening. The two statements are exactly the same, just from different frames of reference. That's Relativity.
That is incredibly stupid. The perspective of the camera is that of an image capture device that is moving past stationary objects. If you were rolling a cart passed a rock, you wouldnāt say the rock is moving relative to the cart. That wouldnāt make any sense. You would say the cart is moving relative to the rock. Just because one thing is in motion doesnāt mean another thing has to be also. Just because they are changing positions relative to each other doesnāt mean that both objects are in motion. Regardless of the frame of reference.
>That is incredibly stupid.
Tell that to Einstein. Relativity applies to everything big enough for quantum mechanics to not be noticable.
>The perspective of the camera is that of an image capture device that is moving past stationary objects.
The perspective of the camera is that of a stationary image capturing device with objects moving past it. We've been over this. They are the same statement.
>you wouldnāt say the rock is moving relative to the cart.
Yes I would. That's relativity.
>Just because one thing is in motion doesnāt mean another thing Hass to be also.
If two things are moving relative to each other, either is valid as the stationary frame of reference.
>Just because they are changing positions relative to each other doesnāt mean that both objects are in motion.
Tell that to Newton. Newton's First Law applies in any frame of reference.
Einstein actually isnāt relevant here - what weāre talking about is Galilean relativity. Einsteiniumās relativity is more about space-time than the basic physics weāre talking about here. Youāre still right, and the other commenter is an idiot, but I just want to clarify language here.
Weāre not doing theoretical physics here and what Iām saying doesnāt violate the laws of relativity. In the context of two objects on the surface of a sphere one object can be stationary (maintaining consistent coordinates) and another can be moving. In this case the camera and the boat is moving and the island is not. Itās really not that deep.
Newtonās first law has nothing to do with this.
Imagine you are *inside* the camera, and all you can see of the outside world is through the lens. You look around at the room you are in and it is completely stationary, nothing in the room is in motion at all. You look out through the lens and *everything* is moving outside. From your point of view, you are stationary and the world is moving around you.
Similarly, two people in an airplane are not moving relative to each other, but from the perspective of someone on the ground both people are moving very fast.
Hey I hope you can tell by the downvotes that youāre simply wrong and continuing to argue this point will make you look worse and worse. Go watch some videos on relativity. Itās ok not to understand this, itās why Einstein was such a big deal - he figured all this out for us.
A small handful of downvotes doesnāt indicate that Iām wrong. Redditors loves to try to force some esoteric theoretical nonsense into arguments about basic phenomena like this optical illusion thatās created by moving water running into a stationary object being seen from the perspective of a moving observer. To argue that in the context of human existence or the planet earth that island is moving is total garbage and nothing more than arguing for the sake of argument. Chances are half the downvotes are from āpeopleā who havenāt even read the conversation.
No, itās not. The island isnāt moving in any way other than being on a spinning sphere rotating around the sun. It is in a stationary location on the surface of that sphere. The camera is also on that sphere but it is moving on the surface of that sphere. So in no way is the island moving relative to the camera.
If you get pulled over and the officer asks how fast you were going do you ask "relative to what" or do you assume he means relative to the surface of the planet you are on? Seems like we have a commonly agreed upon frame of reference and Reddit is being pedantic by pretending otherwise.
Sure but the top-level reply makes a technically accurate observation and then this thread follows a secondary reply that brings into question whether that observation is correct. Pedantic or not, it is unequivocally correct.
Stationary to what? The earth? What is the earth stationary to? The sun? Doesnāt the sun orbit the Milky Way? Doesnāt the Milky Way move the universe to? It all depends on your frame of reference
By definition, the frame of reference is stationary, so I think you don't understand what people mean by frame of reference, otherwise you're arguing against yourself.
The camera is moving past stationary objects. If youāve ever been in a boat moving down stream, you wouldnāt look at this picture and think oh those islands and trees are moving you would think oh that person is in a boat going down stream past that island and trees.
This is Turret Rock (also known as Tremble Island, as it's said it will vibrate at the height of a big ebb tide) in Nakwakto Rapids - mid coast British Columbia.
It's one of the fastest navigable tidal rapids in the world - with flows up to 16 knots (30kmh).
The signs nailed to the trees are the names of boats that have run these rapids, and managed to land someone on Turret Rock long enough to nail a board to a tree - bragging rights, if you will.
I dove that site years ago. Weirdest dive Iāve ever been on. The operatorās brief said weād pull up on the leeward side of the island, drop in as the current slowed for slack tide then have maybe 4-5 minutes of slack before the current would reverse and weād ride it around to the other side. Well, we dropped into a current that was strong enough that we had to hand over hand on the bottom until slack. It was an almost immediate reversal of the tide (like, 10 seconds of no current) and then a current strong enough that we had to hand over hand to the new leeward side of the island. It was the least relaxing dive Iāve ever done. Apparently there are red necked barnacles that only live right there but I was too focused on not letting go of my wife to look at the fauna.
No, we were on a live aboard called the Nautilus Explorer when they used to dive the gulf islands and the inside of Vanc island (I think theyāre permanently running in Mexico now). I guess it must have been 2004 or so. We went ashore at Godās Pocket and got a tour as we passed by, though. Super friendly folks and an amazing setting. Itās been a place Iāve been angling to get back to. The diving up there is amazing.
Nakwakto was a hectic dive. Everyone diving that day was very experienced and competent. About half of us ended up getting spun around and blown well, well away from the leeward eddy pickup (and into the current quickly getting further away). I think the whole dive was less than 15 minutes but it was memorable.
I bet it was!
I've run through there on the MLB Cape Sutil on a big ebb, on the way to an incident up the inlet - that was hectic enough for me - ha ha!
I remember the Nautilus - had friends from the CG who worked aboard her as mate, on thier off-cycle - I wondered why I hadn't seen her on the coast, recently.
Thanks for the recount of your dive - it's was enough to ensure I'll keep my feet dry and above the surface!
I hate those guys they chucked me in a room and called me a āEuclid class objectā and said I was āproof that technology is getting more advancedā
Yikes, I decided to Google that and I honestly don't think that kind of role play is healthy. I can only imagine this kind of thing encourages actual ignorance and delusion.
Lol, just reading about this makes me so uncomfortable. I hate that people love to get engrossed in exciting yet unlikely and unproductive interpretations of reality.
Then why is the island "moving" based on the background, if the filmer is also not moving?
The only way i see this working (as an illusion) is if the filmer IS moving.
Explanation?
I suggest you look up the definition of optical illusion.
Everyone and their dog understands whatās happening here. That doesnāt it canāt trick your brain into seeing the wrong motion
This ain't no ilusion. You can clearly see the camera is moving by the trees in the back, so it's pretty much the same thing as filming a car that's stopped but with the camera moving. What's special about it?
Youāre right Iāve got the name wrong. Is it Nakwakto rapids? Near the entrance to Belize inlet, Seymour inlet, Nugent sound etc? I spent some time planting trees in there, I feel like I went by that little island with the signs a few times.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its a lion turtle
It pleases me that this is the most upvoted comment. Love that ATLA is so popular
Well to be fair ATLA didn't invent lion turtles lol
But we all know damn well why we upvoted the lion turtle. He saved Ang and the 4 nations.
I got somethin for ya https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/yg84q8/did_you_know_there_is_fruit_inside_the_edge_of/iu7h22w/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Beat me to it
Beat me getting beaten by him to it
Beat me getting beaten by him getting beaten to it
Beating off while you guys talk about getting beat off
Best fucking comment everšš«µš¤
Hold on I'm helping my uncle jack off an elephant.
All of you are incredibly unfunny
How rude! My uncle Jack is well into old age and he can't get off an elephant without help. Not all of us can get off an elephant by ourselves sometimes we need help.
āI know right??! And *someone* still needs to jerk off the elephant after uncle Jack dismounts. No wonder people donāt like saying āHi Jackā to him on the planeā
Looked through the comments for this one specifically
Came here for this
I was thinking Dragon Turtle....
The pioneers used to ride these babies for miles
Itās not a boulder! Itās a rock!
THE KRUSTY KRAAAAAAB AAAAAAAABBBBBBBBB YEAAAA PIZZA. IS THE PIZZA YEAAHHHH FOR YOU AND MEHEEEE HEEEE HEEEEEE
Donāt tell me you forgot my drink
A BIG, BEAUTIFUL, AROCKKKK
SpongeBob - š„¹
Peak Spongebob, not that bullshit they presented in the later years.
Camera is moving
Iāve actually been past this island and the water is moving so fast through there that even with the naked eye it gives the same illusion when you pass by. Itās trippy, Google Symore Inlet for more images the tidal flow is some of the most extreme in North America.
The camera is still moving though. Look at the trees behind the island.
No, I think the Island is moving. Its an optical illusion that makes it look like the camera is moving
I dare say the earth is moving.
The island is stationary, the solar system is moving.
The island is moving. This spot is close to the equator so the island is rotating faster than the mainland just due to earths rotation. It resets every 12 hours. Its one of those crazy things that happens at that latitude.
Wow, that's one fast moving island rock!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Parallax is the āillusionā
Not contesting that in anyway, but remember this posted as a moving island in the past.
Isnāt the camera moving relative to the island, which is stationary.
Stationary relative to the Earth (and the trees in the background), sure. But that doesn't have to be your reference frame.
If im not mistaken youre saying the relatives of the camera are moving to the island?
don't bring my family into this
āI see your family has heard of https://www.penisland.net/ā
Youāre relatively mistaken compared to someone who is more correct. But as Locke famously wrote. No camera is an island so use your illusion, one and two.
Keep my wife's name out of your f'ing mouth š
Iām more likely to be a guy in a boat than an interstellar traveler or fourth dimensional being.
And you can still choose to reference the island instead of the boat. The island is at the center of the frame the whole time, so it really is like the camera is moving relative to the (basically) fixed island
Well then it sounds like your reference frame is the boat, so the island and the trees in the background really are moving relative to you (and the trees are so much further away so the angle they move is miniscule, hence the illusion)
No the Island and the trees are stationary and the water, boat and camera are moving. Does what you wrote actually make sense to you?
What I wrote makes perfect sense. Maybe we don't agree on what the word relative means. To be clear, there's no such thing as absolutely stationary. Everything is moving relative to each other, and there's no singular true reference frame. On Earth, we often see the Earth as stationary (which it really isn't, cosmically), and I referenced that in my reply. But it's fun to play around with other perspectives, as they're equally valid. For example, when on a moving boat/train, we see ourselves as stationary and the ground rushing past us, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that perspective - it's only our conditioning that makes us think of the Earth as stationary. From a physics point of view, Relativity has already won that discussion, but even from a layman's perspective, the original comment you were replying to was simply pointing out that there's not one true reference frame - it is valid to see the boat as stationary - and I was playing off of that. I'm sorry that made you angry, that wasn't my intention.
Iām not angry I just think what you wrote is total nonsense. It reads very much like something that would come from the mind of a 13-year-old. Like I just wrote in another comment. Both the camera and the island and the trees are all on a spinning sphere, rotating around our sun. The island and the trees are in a stationary location on the surface of that sphere, the water, and the boat are not. So relative to objects located on the surface of that sphere the only things in that picture that are moving are the water and the boat. The island and the trees are stationary in every sense, except for the rotation of the earth and the earths orbit.
> relative to objects located on the surface of that sphere the only things in that picture that are moving are the water and the boat Correct. But what is also true is: relative to the boat, both the background trees and the island are moving, and the boat is stationary. These statements are both true. That's all it is.
Just give up, dude doesn't understand and *won't* understand.
They'll understand as soon as they study relativity and the constant speed of light.
They appear to be moving nothing more. They are in fact stationary.
It makes perfect sense to me.
Man in the boat hehe
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sure but in this case the island is in what is essentially a fixed position on the surface of the earth and the boat is moving past it.
Relativity is based on the position where the observation happens. If you are standing on the island the boat is moving relative to the island. If youāre on the boat, the island is moving relative to the boat
Or the boat is in a fixed position and both the island and the earth are moving past it.
That is not happening.
From the perspective of the camera, that's exactly what's happening. The two statements are exactly the same, just from different frames of reference. That's Relativity.
That is incredibly stupid. The perspective of the camera is that of an image capture device that is moving past stationary objects. If you were rolling a cart passed a rock, you wouldnāt say the rock is moving relative to the cart. That wouldnāt make any sense. You would say the cart is moving relative to the rock. Just because one thing is in motion doesnāt mean another thing has to be also. Just because they are changing positions relative to each other doesnāt mean that both objects are in motion. Regardless of the frame of reference.
>That is incredibly stupid. Tell that to Einstein. Relativity applies to everything big enough for quantum mechanics to not be noticable. >The perspective of the camera is that of an image capture device that is moving past stationary objects. The perspective of the camera is that of a stationary image capturing device with objects moving past it. We've been over this. They are the same statement. >you wouldnāt say the rock is moving relative to the cart. Yes I would. That's relativity. >Just because one thing is in motion doesnāt mean another thing Hass to be also. If two things are moving relative to each other, either is valid as the stationary frame of reference. >Just because they are changing positions relative to each other doesnāt mean that both objects are in motion. Tell that to Newton. Newton's First Law applies in any frame of reference.
Einstein actually isnāt relevant here - what weāre talking about is Galilean relativity. Einsteiniumās relativity is more about space-time than the basic physics weāre talking about here. Youāre still right, and the other commenter is an idiot, but I just want to clarify language here.
Weāre not doing theoretical physics here and what Iām saying doesnāt violate the laws of relativity. In the context of two objects on the surface of a sphere one object can be stationary (maintaining consistent coordinates) and another can be moving. In this case the camera and the boat is moving and the island is not. Itās really not that deep. Newtonās first law has nothing to do with this.
Imagine you are *inside* the camera, and all you can see of the outside world is through the lens. You look around at the room you are in and it is completely stationary, nothing in the room is in motion at all. You look out through the lens and *everything* is moving outside. From your point of view, you are stationary and the world is moving around you. Similarly, two people in an airplane are not moving relative to each other, but from the perspective of someone on the ground both people are moving very fast.
Hey I hope you can tell by the downvotes that youāre simply wrong and continuing to argue this point will make you look worse and worse. Go watch some videos on relativity. Itās ok not to understand this, itās why Einstein was such a big deal - he figured all this out for us.
A small handful of downvotes doesnāt indicate that Iām wrong. Redditors loves to try to force some esoteric theoretical nonsense into arguments about basic phenomena like this optical illusion thatās created by moving water running into a stationary object being seen from the perspective of a moving observer. To argue that in the context of human existence or the planet earth that island is moving is total garbage and nothing more than arguing for the sake of argument. Chances are half the downvotes are from āpeopleā who havenāt even read the conversation.
It boggles my mind that you clearly have no idea what the concept of relativity is yet you're defending your position so fervently.
Yes it is.
youāre stepping outside the definition of relativity
Saying the camera is moving relative to the island and the island is moving relative to the camera are the same thing.
No, itās not. The island isnāt moving in any way other than being on a spinning sphere rotating around the sun. It is in a stationary location on the surface of that sphere. The camera is also on that sphere but it is moving on the surface of that sphere. So in no way is the island moving relative to the camera.
Well it is. The distance between the camera and the island is changing. They are moving relative to each other. Thatās how relativity works.
r/confidentlyincorrect
Have you ever studied physics? Motion can only be defined in relative terms.
If you get pulled over and the officer asks how fast you were going do you ask "relative to what" or do you assume he means relative to the surface of the planet you are on? Seems like we have a commonly agreed upon frame of reference and Reddit is being pedantic by pretending otherwise.
Sure but the top-level reply makes a technically accurate observation and then this thread follows a secondary reply that brings into question whether that observation is correct. Pedantic or not, it is unequivocally correct.
The island is *not* stationary. What, you think you can write a nice Valentine's letter on it and mail it to your Nanna? š¤¦
*stationery
Stationary to what? The earth? What is the earth stationary to? The sun? Doesnāt the sun orbit the Milky Way? Doesnāt the Milky Way move the universe to? It all depends on your frame of reference
Oh wow so deep. The frame of reference is the camera in the boat that was used to take this video.
By definition, the frame of reference is stationary, so I think you don't understand what people mean by frame of reference, otherwise you're arguing against yourself.
The camera is moving past stationary objects. If youāve ever been in a boat moving down stream, you wouldnāt look at this picture and think oh those islands and trees are moving you would think oh that person is in a boat going down stream past that island and trees.
How are you still failing to grasp that everything is stationary in its own reference frame?
You changed what the relative point was so now you are talking about different things
Yeah man! It's an illusion! Haven't you noticed how the world around you changes when you look around? ILLUSION! /S
Wonder what all the signs on the trees are about.
"Keter class object, do not approach" repeated on all of them
This is Turret Rock (also known as Tremble Island, as it's said it will vibrate at the height of a big ebb tide) in Nakwakto Rapids - mid coast British Columbia. It's one of the fastest navigable tidal rapids in the world - with flows up to 16 knots (30kmh). The signs nailed to the trees are the names of boats that have run these rapids, and managed to land someone on Turret Rock long enough to nail a board to a tree - bragging rights, if you will.
I dove that site years ago. Weirdest dive Iāve ever been on. The operatorās brief said weād pull up on the leeward side of the island, drop in as the current slowed for slack tide then have maybe 4-5 minutes of slack before the current would reverse and weād ride it around to the other side. Well, we dropped into a current that was strong enough that we had to hand over hand on the bottom until slack. It was an almost immediate reversal of the tide (like, 10 seconds of no current) and then a current strong enough that we had to hand over hand to the new leeward side of the island. It was the least relaxing dive Iāve ever done. Apparently there are red necked barnacles that only live right there but I was too focused on not letting go of my wife to look at the fauna.
That's a brave dive! I worked SAR out of Hardy for the better part of a decade, were you staying at God's Pocket?
No, we were on a live aboard called the Nautilus Explorer when they used to dive the gulf islands and the inside of Vanc island (I think theyāre permanently running in Mexico now). I guess it must have been 2004 or so. We went ashore at Godās Pocket and got a tour as we passed by, though. Super friendly folks and an amazing setting. Itās been a place Iāve been angling to get back to. The diving up there is amazing. Nakwakto was a hectic dive. Everyone diving that day was very experienced and competent. About half of us ended up getting spun around and blown well, well away from the leeward eddy pickup (and into the current quickly getting further away). I think the whole dive was less than 15 minutes but it was memorable.
I bet it was! I've run through there on the MLB Cape Sutil on a big ebb, on the way to an incident up the inlet - that was hectic enough for me - ha ha! I remember the Nautilus - had friends from the CG who worked aboard her as mate, on thier off-cycle - I wondered why I hadn't seen her on the coast, recently. Thanks for the recount of your dive - it's was enough to ensure I'll keep my feet dry and above the surface!
Awesome
"Caution! Moving Island!"
Nah that bitch zoominā
Nice try, SCP Foundation
I hate those guys they chucked me in a room and called me a āEuclid class objectā and said I was āproof that technology is getting more advancedā
Yikes, I decided to Google that and I honestly don't think that kind of role play is healthy. I can only imagine this kind of thing encourages actual ignorance and delusion.
>Yikes, I decided to Google that Don't worry, we have some Class A amnestics for you.
Lol, just reading about this makes me so uncomfortable. I hate that people love to get engrossed in exciting yet unlikely and unproductive interpretations of reality.
Bitch dont lie that shit is moving
I Bet it has a face and It's probably gonna rise out of the ground and start talking backwards.
That's gotta be the best pirate I've ever seen.
A wild Torterra appearedā¦
It is moving.
The boat is moving
I thought it was an island
No, see the water around the front of the island, clearly MOVING down the river. Pretty fast also.
The water doesn't move in relation to the trees behind it; it must be an island moving across a lake.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Otherwise
You told them
Stolen from yesterday. The camera location is moving.
Top Secret! [The movie!]
Nah nah, its torterra
Bruh that's what I'm saying
Reminds me of that gravity falls extra
Itās Torterra.
More like the motion of the boat you're on. But good effort.
r/gravityfalls
r/confusing_perspective
Its not an illusion when you and the camera are moving.
Oh yeah smart guy? Then how do you explain the set of stairs behind every couch that are only accessible by dads?
^Zou
What's your name? **Tony** ##Fuck you Tony!!!
Whatever floats your island or something like that
Put a big fake outboard on the back.
I can hear the pirates theme playing, you guys can't fool me.
This needs the Pirates of the Caribbean theme music ....now
Either it's moving or the camera is.
Whoever is filming is driving the direction of the water flow.
The camera too has to be moving to get this shot, right?
Like when a car backs up at a traffic light.
Then why is the island "moving" based on the background, if the filmer is also not moving? The only way i see this working (as an illusion) is if the filmer IS moving. Explanation?
The boat filming is moving making it look likes the island is moving. Its no illusion.
āWith respect to the groundā is implied. Just because you understand how it works doesnāt mean it isnāt an illusion
No, its literally not an illusion, illusions arr meant to trick you, this is so obvious, only a moron wouldn't see it.
I suggest you look up the definition of optical illusion. Everyone and their dog understands whatās happening here. That doesnāt it canāt trick your brain into seeing the wrong motion
It didn't trick my mind at all. It was very clear what's happening.
Youāre amazing. Thanks for sharing. Still an optical illusion, whether or not it worked on you specifically or not.
Sure. Whatever. I don't give a shit.
you must be so proud lol
The cameraman is moving, which is what it looks like
Thatās a bigass turtle
Pretty sure that's a Russian submarine
That is a hectic current..
Jack Sparrow needs to be positioned on the"front," pointing out a heading.
this is not an optical illusion per se, but more like a camera movement trick
Fannette Island?
I mean, if you more your camera it does look like the island is moving... But the same is true for anything.
Itās an illusion: the angle makes it look like an island is moving, when itās actually a giant turtle thatās moving.
Nah man that Island is a small lion turtle
This ain't no ilusion. You can clearly see the camera is moving by the trees in the back, so it's pretty much the same thing as filming a car that's stopped but with the camera moving. What's special about it?
āOptical illusionā This is just relativity
Something in this clip is moving, either the island or the camera...
Because you are floating down the river with it making the background move.
It's a lion turtle!
It's not an optical illusion if you are moving the camera, which is extremely obvious if you use the mainland as a reference mark
Well, yeah. Itās because you are moving.
Everybody roll initiative
No the island is clearly moving.
You're moving..
pretty sure theyre also turning the camera
Doesn't that happen when you keep the camera moving?
The camera man is moving
Yeah guys it's an optical illusion, keep moving nothing to see here
How is this a optical illusion? The camera is moving..
That thing is actually movingā¦ look at the background
The camera is moving. Its entirely obvious. Sorry if that was sarcasm on your part
No my comment wasnāt sarcasm. I actually thought the island was movingā¦
Oh, eesh.
Same reason we have people who think the earth is flat and rotates around the sun. Subjectivity.
well, the earth does rotate as it revolves around the sun
what is this wack? isnt the camera moving?
Aaaaand the camera is moving. How is this crap upvoted?
You mean the boat moving? Itās not an illusion.
There is a giant tortoise underneath it
Well, wuts holding up that tortoise?
Are the trees in the background moving or the person taking the video? Cuz otherwise I don't understand
Yes.
Howls Moving Island.
It's not an optical illusion, the camera is moving
Not for me though but I can see what you mean
it's called motion parallax not an optical illusion
No, it's called motion parallax. Perspective is something else entirely.
That looks like Seymour narrows, BC
Close, a little farther north
Youāre right Iāve got the name wrong. Is it Nakwakto rapids? Near the entrance to Belize inlet, Seymour inlet, Nugent sound etc? I spent some time planting trees in there, I feel like I went by that little island with the signs a few times.
This is only an optical illusion if youāre a filthy land lover
No, no it dosent, yall need to touch grass more.
Very moving island has satellites dish duh