What if you're wrong?

I was referring to a passenger jet, from which I have seen the curve of the earth, as have millions of others, it is not I, but you who are in the minority, so stop trying to pick on a pedantic point to deflect from your inability to answer simple questions that challenge your theory.

5. Summary and Conclusions
In view of the agreement between the visual observations,
measurements of the photographs, and the
theoretical curvatures, it seems well established that
the curvature of the Earth is reasonably well understood
and can be measured from photographs. The
threshold elevation for detecting curvature would
seem to be somewhat less than 35; 000 ft but not
as low as 14; 000 ft. Photographically, curvature may
be measurable as low as 20; 000 ft.

If you are referring to 5000 feet, obviously yes, but my last plane flight was at about 37000 feet, above the threshold. Didn't get a window seat though, and it was stormy that day.

5. Summary and Conclusions
In view of the agreement between the visual observations,
measurements of the photographs, and the
theoretical curvatures, it seems well established that
the curvature of the Earth is reasonably well understood
and can be measured from photographs. The
threshold elevation for detecting curvature would
seem to be somewhat less than 35; 000 ft but not
as low as 14; 000 ft. Photographically, curvature may
be measurable as low as 20; 000 ft.

Interviews with pilots and high-elevation travelers
revealed that few if any could detect curvature below
about 50; 000 ft. High-altitude physicist and experienced
sky observer David Gutierrez [6] reported that
as his B-57 ascends, the curvature of the horizon does
not become readily sensible until about 50; 000 ft and
that at 60; 000 ft the curvature is obvious. Having
talked to many other high fliers (SR-71, U2, etc.),
Gutierrez confirms that his sense of the curvature
is the same as theirs. Passengers on the Concorde
(60; 000 ft) routinely marveled at the curvature of
the Earth. Gutierrez believes that if the field of view
(FOV) is wide enough, it might be possible to detect
curvature from lower altitudes. The author has also
talked to many commercial pilots, and they report
that from elevations around 35; 000 ft, they cannot
see the curvature.

I have read this article many times, and I still don't understand why we are supposed to accept his testimony over that of others.

I have read this article many times, and I still don't understand why we are supposed to accept his testimony over that of others.

I performed the following experiment while on a plane one time:

Items required:
1 plane ticket
1 straight edge

While in a plane, I first compared the straight edge to a long (known) straight line on the airport through the plane window as a control to eliminate any warping effects by the window itself as a cause for curvature.

Then while in the air at cruising altitude, I then compared the straight edge to the horizon again, and detected a small amount of curvature.

I will admit, with the unassisted naked eye, I could not detect any curvature, but even simple tools can be effective.

Why should we accept his testimony any less than the testimony of people here?

Because, unlike many FE'ers here, he supports his arguments with actual research.

While in a plane, I first compared the straight edge to a long (known) straight line on the airport through the plane window as a control to eliminate any warping effects by the window itself as a cause for curvature.

Did "many pilots" perform similar experiments to the one I did? I readily admitted that I was unable to detect curvature with the naked eye, and the article didn't say anything about them using tools in an active effort to detect curvature.

I am asking why he thinks his single experience outweighs the experiences of all the people he mentions in his article who contradict him.

You haven't commented on the rather famous link yet. I take it it's all faked using CGI and the Earth is still flat because.....er......you say so.