So a level view won't magically hide the RE.
The key is the FOV, that you keep ignoring.
You are ignoring the downward curve of your so called globe.
No, I'm not.
That downwards curve is the very reason we have a horizon in the first place.
It is also the very reason that your ability to see Earth depends upon your FOV.
For a FE, ignoring the atmosphere and assuming your FOV is non-zero, then you will be able to see Earth because eventually the downwards part of your FOV will intersect that flat Earth.
But for a RE, as Earth is curving, then your ability to see it depend on if your FOV gets low enough, before the curve of Earth gets too "steep".
So no, the downwards curve is the very reason SCALE MATTERS, and FOV MATTERS!
So I'm not ignoring it at all.
Your FOV becomes irrelevant over distance.
That depends on the distance.
Over a very short distance, your FOV is not large enough to see the ground, such as few cm from your feet.
Over an intermediate distance, your FOV determines if you can see Earth or not.
Only over much larger distance, once you reach the horizon, does FOV become irrelevant as Earth now starts blocking the view.
But the key part is that region between your feet and the horizon, where the FOV determined if you can see Earth.
The only reason you pretend FOV doesn't matter is because it kills your arguments against the globe and thus by pretending it doesn't matter you can pretend the globe doesn't match reality.
The reason I accept the fact that FOV does matter, is because that is what simple logic and math shows.
Simple math allows you to determine the angle between "level" and the horizon, or the line tangent to the globe.
This is quite simple math based upon simple triangles.
The angle subtended at the centre is a.
This forms a right angle triangle with one side length R (the radius of Earth), which goes from the centre to the tangent point. As it is a tangent it is a right angle at that point going back to your eye. With the hypotenuse being of length R+h, where h is the observer elevation.
Simple math tells us the angle at the centre is acos(R/(R+h)).
Simple math also tells us that the angle at the person, from straight down is thus 90 degrees - acos(R/(R+h)); and from there the angle from level to the tangent is 90 degrees - (90 degrees - acos(R/(R+h))) = acos(R/(R+h)).
If you are looking dead level, and your FOV is larger than twice that angle, YOU WILL SEE THE GLOBE!
It is really quite simple.
And if all that math and numbers are too hard, it is also demonstrated trivially with diagrams you are still unable to refute, like this one, already provided in this thread and other threads:
This shows us 2 different elevations and 2 different FOVs (i.e. 2 different angles).
From the high elevation, the yellow FOV is not large enough to see Earth, but the brown one is.
But from a lower vantage point the yellow FOV is large enough to see Earth.
So it is quite clear that FOV does matter.
If you wish to claim it doesn't, and expect anyone who has read this to take you seriously, you need to explain why it doesn't matter, and the downwards curve of Earth is not enough.
But a key take away for you is that me accepting the fact that Earth is ~ a globe has nothing to do with me accepting the fact that FOV does matter.
Even if I was a flat Earther, I would still accept the fact that on a globe, your ability to see Earth from a level view will depend on your FOV, and your elevation above Earth.