When will RE Community Accept Defeat?

You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out. All you need is to apply common sense with science to find a logical explanation.
 




With the right atmospheric conditions, one can view the Sun fade away above the horizon through the atmosphere bank. 

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

I was expressing a point that nothing matters because no one has actually proved, verified the alleged surface (length and width) curvature of any landmass. It's all assumptions and claims. No argument will prove it to be true.

Again, you ignoring what has been proven doesn't mean it hasn't been proven.

As for the next image of nonsense, that doesn't explain what has been asked at all.

If that was what was happening, the sun would appear high in the sky, appearing first as a bright region of fog getting clearer until we can actually see the sun as a clear object.
After that it would appear to get closer, and move faster reaching its maximum speed and size when overhead (or solar noon), before starting to slow down and shrink, until it fades back to a blur of the fog.

This does not match what is observed.
Instead the sun rises from below the horizon, being clearly visible right from the start, it maintains a near constant speed and size as it goes overhead, and then sets below the horizon.
The other important thing it leaves out is light going upwards near sunrise and sunset.

So good job showing the FE does not match reality at all.
Another defeat of FE.

If you wish to disagree, feel free to go over the actual issues people have raised and address them rather than just spouting a collection of nonsense which doesn't match reality at all.

With the right atmospheric  conditions

What you are appealing to should be occurring on a daily basis, not just occasionally due to a highly specific set of atmospheric conditions.

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 11, 2019, 02:29:39 PM

With the right atmospheric  conditions

What you are appealing to should be occurring on a daily basis, not just occasionally due to a highly specific set of atmospheric conditions.

Not just on a daily basis, but all of the time for all observers all over the world because the sun is observed by many people all over the world at the same time during daylight hours.

You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out. All you need is to apply common sense with science to find a logical explanation.

Maybe "You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out" but it would better if you had observed these things yourself.

And the science you apply is "cherry-picked" thoughts misapplied.

Where Did Our Flat Earth Sun Go?

Understanding our atmosphere will help explain a few things about our Sun.
Water limits what we can see and how far we can see and as a fluid, so does Air. The brightest lights cannot break through a very thick fog bank unless it is close enough to the viewer. As the light gets closer, the fog bank will first be lit up from within like twilight, then as the light source gets even closer, the center beam breaks through and it can be seen making things brighter.

The principle is the same for the beginning of a day on our Plane Earth with the understanding of perspective and a linear atmosphere bank. After the Sun again has made its circle, it begins to light up our atmosphere over the eastern horizon and through thousands of miles of linear atmosphere the viewer can see the first hint of morning, Twilight. As the minutes pass the Sun breaks through at the horizon because now the linear miles the Sun has to shine through atmosphere to reach the viewer have been reduced. As time passes the miles are decreased even more and it gets brighter and warmer and peaks at solar noon.

Due to perspective, the Sun appears to rise and fall from viewpoint, but the Sun remains about 3200 miles above earths surface during it's circular cycle. As the day progresses, the Sun again will reach the west horizon and as the Sun's miles progress even farther away from the viewer, twilight begins again. Then after a few minutes the longer atmosphere bank will cast a shadow of darkness upon the viewer, making it night once again.

That's a nice story but that's all it is - a story.

The start is OK, with "it begins to light up our atmosphere over the eastern horizon and through thousands of miles of linear atmosphere the viewer can see the first hint of morning" but it all goes awry.

You say that, "As the minutes pass the Sun breaks through at the horizon because now the linear miles the Sun has to shine through atmosphere to reach the viewer have been reduced."
But, even at sunrise, your sun is still around 3200 miles above the earth and of the order of 10,000 miles (depending on the season and location) away.
That puts your sun somewhere around 19° above the horizon - that is all perspective can do for you.
Now I'm fully aware that the changing air density can bend light but only by 0.5° of so and in the wrong direction.

So there is no way that your sun can appear near the horizon but it gets worse than that, far far worse!
The real sun seems to be initially below the horizon and rise from behind it.
There is no way that perspective can one object make an object above another appear to be below it and refraction can't help. Remember these?
But on the flat earth the sun is supposedly always about 3200 miles above the earth.

Note how the sun does not appear as if it approaches through the murk but rise with full disk fully illuminated from behind
something".

So "You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out" just look at a beautiful sunrise or sunset!

And I note that even in your own diagram you don't show how the sun could be as low as the horizon, let alone below it.

Nope! Your explanation for the sun's staying exactly the same size is pure guesswork.
I know the atmosphere can refract light slightly when an object like the sun is very close to the horizon but that does not magnify it.

No, Mr Plat Terra, you are the one that is completely wrong here!

You say that "Author", that's ME, "does not include a key element in the argument; thousands of miles of Linear atmosphere and Light refraction."
But there are NO "thousands of miles of Linear atmosphere"! The effective thickness of the earth's atmosphere is no more than the equivalent of about 9 km (of sea-level density air) so even that 45° slanted path is only through no more than 13 km of sea-level.

And even then there has been much research into the refraction of light coming into the atmosphere from the outside:
See Refraction deviation angles for an observer at sea level, M. E. THOMAS AND R. I. JOSEPH See Table 1 at Refraction deviation angles for an observer at sea level, Table 1.
From that you will find that at 45° from the zenith the refraction is only about one minute of arc (¹/₆₀ degree).
That very informative table will also show that even right on the horizon the usual refraction is only about 34.5' or arc or a bit over 0.5°.

You say "One who leaves out such important issues is being intellectually dishonest and knows better" but, Mr Plat Terra, refraction is a very trivial issue  here.
So, I have not been intellectually dishonest in drawing up that diagram and is essentially the same as the one that you flat earthers use to justify you son's distance above the earth being about 3200 miles.

I'd be careful throwing these accusations about because they might just come back and bite YOU as this one has!

One who falsely accuses another "being intellectually dishonest" should, at the very least, offer an apology - how about it?

With the right atmospheric conditions, one can view the Sun fade away above the horizon through the atmosphere bank. 

Possibly "with the right atmospheric conditions" but the sun rises and sets quite predictably.
And it does not usually seem to "fade away above the horizon through the atmosphere bank." Always, on a clear day, the set just seems to slowly go down behind the western horizon like this:

LHG-0693 - Sunset Karumba 20070808 06.25.02, 300 mm

LHG-0697 - Sunset Karumba 20070808 06.25.29, 300 mm

I naturally think that the sun is really being hidden behind something, the horizon on the Globe.

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"! But explain this on a flat earth!

Hawaii Sunset with Green Flash by Natalie Sirgo

So once again a flat earther fails to explain something we can all so easily observe sunrises and sunsets!

So from what I can see your explanation of "Where Did Our Flat Earth Sun Go? " does not explain what we really see at all unless you make quite unwarranted and incorrect assumptions about perspective, visibility and refraction.

PS Don't forget that apology!

Quote from: Macarios on August 10, 2019, 04:39:31 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 09, 2019, 11:41:04 PM

Yes the theory is not yours nor does it pertain to the length and width of Florida as verified surface curvature, and you have not including the morning horizon  which will have about the same angular size as sunset.   Then what is the difference between sunrise, sunset and Noon?

If anone could understand what did you ask...

Let me try to make some sense out of your sentence:

The morning horizon is not related to the size of Florida, or the percentage of the planet's surface that Florida occupies.

The sunrise and sunset in the Rowbotham's FE model will have the same angular diameter of the Sun, little less than 0.3 degrees.
The solar noon in the Rowbotham's FE model will have the Sun's angular diameter much bigger. Roughly two to three times bigger.

Another difference between sunrise, sunset and noon would be the azimuth of the Sun.

I was expressing a point that nothing matters because no one has actually proved, verified the alleged surface (length and width) curvature of any landmass. It's all assumptions and claims. No argument will prove it to be true.

No arguments were trying to prove it.
Direct measurements do.

The meridian through Paris, at the segment between Dunkirk and Barcelona,
was measured directly when the first definition of the Metre was established.

It was not measured by arguments, it was measured by geodesic instruments.

Quote from: Plat Terra

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"!

Why is "There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"?  It's doing what a Flat Earth Sun does. It's doing what you claim it can't do on a Globe Earth.

So now you think it's possible for the Sun to fade away above the horizon on a Globe Earth at sunset? Is this correct?

Wait, you really think the sun is changing size in that video?

I was expressing a point that nothing matters because no one has actually proved, verified the alleged surface (length and width) curvature of any landmass. It's all assumptions and claims. No argument will prove it to be true.

No it is not! But nobody is obliged to do the particular measurement that YOU ask for!

Measurements of the curvature of the earth have been performed for millennia. Eratosthenes effectively did it.

And astronomers etc did it in the first millennium AD for example:

• History of Geodesy: Caliph al-Ma'mun: "Around AD 830 commissioned a group of astronomers led by Al-Khwarizmi to measure the distance from Tadmur (Palmyra) to Raqqa, in modern Syria. They found the cities to be separated by one degree of latitude and the distance between them to be 66 ²/₃ miles and thus calculated the Earth's circumference to be 24,000 miles. Another estimate given was 56  ²/₃ Arabic miles per degree, which corresponds to 111.8 km per degree and a circumference of 40,248 km, very close to the currently modern values of 111.3 km per degree and 40,068 km circumference, respectively."
  
  
• Quote

  Abu Rayhan Biruni (973–1048)[/i[/url]: Al Biruni used a new method to accurately compute the Earth's circumference, by which he arrived at a value that was close to modern values for the Earth's circumference. His estimate of 6,339.9 km for the Earth radius was only 16.8 km less than the modern value of 6,356.7 km. In contrast to his predecessors, who measured the Earth's circumference by sighting the Sun simultaneously from two different locations, Biruni developed a new method of using trigonometric calculations based on the angle between a plain and mountain top. This yielded more accurate measurements of the Earth's circumference and made it possible for a single person to measure it from a single location. Biruni's method was intended to avoid "walking across hot, dusty deserts," and the idea came to him when he was on top of a tall mountain in India. From the top of the mountain, he sighted the angle to the horizon which, along with the mountain's height (which he calculated beforehand), allowed him to calculate the curvature of the Earth. He also made use of algebra to formulate trigonometric equations and used the astrolabe to measure angles.

  Biruni's method for calculation of Earth's radius

Here more evidence that the horizon falls below "eye-level" showing that the earth's surface has curvature:

Andrew Eddie found that, from Flaxton Gardens, Queensland (418 m above sea-level), Mount Coolum (208 m above sea-level) lines up with the horizon.
This makes it certain that the horizon is below the local horizontal.
I presented that one because it is only about 111 km from where I live and I have been to Flaxton gardens and have seen Mt Coolum many times.

Any observation like that is observing the earth's curvature and one could calculate the radius of the earth from the altitudes and distance.

The horizon might appear to rise to eye-level, but it does not quite rise to the local horizontal at the viewing point.

Here is more photographic evidence of this:


Flat Earth? Mountains rising to meet eye-level? Andrew Eddie

The opening screen does show only 0.523° but that is over a flat surface and at 2:55 the video has a more accurate calculation showing that from an altitude of 418 m the horizon is about 0.626° below eye-level.
That's not all that much less than the horizon Dip of 0.66° given by Metabunk''s Earth's Curve Horizon, Bulge, Drop, and Hidden Calculator.

So the horizon does not rise to eye-level.

And the dip angle of the horizon from a known altitude allows the earth's radius to be calculated.

I was expressing a point that nothing matters because no one has actually proved, verified the alleged surface (length and width) curvature of any landmass. It's all assumptions and claims. No argument will prove it to be true.

Wait - what?
Is plata asking for the AVERAGE curvature of a land mass to be measured?
The land masses that vary in heights above sea level due to mountians and valleys and such?

Why does ONE area of land mass require measuring (even though its already been measured)?

What proof do you need (when in north america you clearly see stars different from south america/ south of equator)?

Plenty arguments prove true as mentioned in pg1 thru now.

What are you on about?

Quote from: rabinoz on August 11, 2019, 06:23:48 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"!

Why is "There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"?  It's doing what a Flat Earth Sun does. It's doing what you claim it can't do on a Globe Earth.

So now you think it's possible for the Sun to fade away above the horizon on a Globe Earth at sunset? Is this correct?

It can easily appear to do that if the original size is made to appear excessively large because of the glare (ie overexposure of the camera around the sun's disc).
Then as the sun approaches the horizon the light passes through more very hazy atmosphere and intensity reduces allowing the true sun's size to show.

Please learn a little about photography before you tackle this sort of thing.

Now explain this sort of sunrise (click anywhere, it links to a video):

Video of Sunrise over Black Sea HD 265,498 views by kalcymc

and this sort of sunset:

LHG-0693 - Sunset Karumba 20070808 06.25.02, 300 mm

LHG-0697 - Sunset Karumba 20070808 06.25.29, 300 mm

You seem to have forgotten something!

No, Mr Plat Terra, you are the one that is completely wrong here!

You say that "Author", that's ME, "does not include a key element in the argument; thousands of miles of Linear atmosphere and Light refraction."
But there are NO "thousands of miles of Linear atmosphere"! The effective thickness of the earth's atmosphere is no more than the equivalent of about 9 km (of sea-level density air) so even that 45° slanted path is only through no more than 13 km of sea-level.

And even then there has been much research into the refraction of light coming into the atmosphere from the outside:
See Refraction deviation angles for an observer at sea level, M. E. THOMAS AND R. I. JOSEPH See Table 1 at Refraction deviation angles for an observer at sea level, Table 1.
From that you will find that at 45° from the zenith the refraction is only about one minute of arc (¹/₆₀ degree).
That very informative table will also show that even right on the horizon the usual refraction is only about 34.5' or arc or a bit over 0.5°.

You say "One who leaves out such important issues is being intellectually dishonest and knows better" but, Mr Plat Terra, refraction is a very trivial issue  here.
So, I have not been intellectually dishonest in drawing up that diagram and is essentially the same as the one that you flat earthers use to justify you son's distance above the earth being about 3200 miles.

I'd be careful throwing these accusations about because they might just come back and bite YOU as this one has!

One who falsely accuses another "being intellectually dishonest" should, at the very least, offer an apology - how about it?

You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out. All you need is to apply common sense with science to find a logical explanation.

With the right atmospheric conditions, one can view the Sun fade away above the horizon through the atmosphere bank. 

Questions:

First off, we were asking, Where did/does your flat earth sun go? Specifically. As in, just before your sunset, where is the sun? How far away is it from you? What part of the world is it over? But you dodged that very basic question in order to make yet another blather of a meme.

So, as you would say, nighttime is caused by a "weather phenomena”? This "atmosphere bank”, this ‘Fog' you speak of? And this atmospheric fog bank is present for every sunset and sunrise for every observer, every time, everywhere on earth? Really? What’s your evidence for such a claim?

What you’re proposing is that, due to perspective, the sun at rise is shrunken but magnified by the atmospheric fog bank to pretty much the exact angular size of a noon day sun. Then as it passes over toward sunset it is shrinking in angular size due to perspective but at the same time been magnified by the atmospheric fog bank to appear to the observer to be the same angular size as a noon day sun?

And this atmospheric fog bank weather phenomena happens, again, for every observer, every time, everywhere on earth?

Why doesn’t this atmospheric fog bank weather phenomena affect other objects all the time, everywhere, that recede from the observer. Why isn’t everything magnified as it goes off into the distance?

How does this account for days where no discernible atmospheric fog bank weather phenomena is present? Or any number of filtered time lapses you’ve been shown where the sun's (or moon) size doesn’t change and remains looking crisp, no refractive distortion whatsoever?

I notice you yet again ignore the issues raised.

Why is "There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"?  It's doing what a Flat Earth Sun does. It's doing what you claim it can't do on a Globe Earth.

In what way is what happens in the video impossible on a globe Earth?

You have a very low quality video with serious issues with glare. It is quite difficult to see where the horizon is.

Guess what? On the very real globe Earth, glare is quite well known.

Also, they seem to have cut the footage off a little too late:

The sun is getting cut off, not fading to a blur or shrinking to a point.

But again, you are completely ignoring what happens on a daily basis with the sun clearly setting below the horizon, and not appearing to change size.

How about you try and address that?

Quote from: rabinoz on August 11, 2019, 06:23:48 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"!

Why is "There's nothing about that sunset that's "Impossible on a Globe Earth"?  It's doing what a Flat Earth Sun does. It's doing what you claim it can't do on a Globe Earth.

So now you think it's possible for the Sun to fade away above the horizon on a Globe Earth at sunset? Is this correct?

Answered elsewhere. Now show a time-lapse video of the moon setting like that.

This is more like the moon setting that I see:

Supermoon 2016 - Moonset Time-Lapse by Aryeh Nirenberg
Even a bit of a mirage very close to the horizon.

Here have fun with this :

One minute, you're chilling on a mountain. The next you're being dwarfed by the biggest Moon you've ever seen - one that seems to be coming right down to rest on Earth's surface.

That's what appears to be happening in this video on NASA's Astronomy Picture of The Day (APOD) site for 4 June 2018.

Of course, we all would have totally noticed if our planet's rocky satellite came down like that, ending life as we know it. So, what's going on here?

For starters, check out the full video below, because it's spectacular:


What you're looking at is the view of Mount Teide, a volcano in the Canary Islands - taken through a telescopic lens from really, really far away.

The Moon we're seeing here is known as a 'milk moon' – the first full moon in the month of May. The footage was captured on May 30 by Daniel López.

The people in the video are around 16 kilometres away (10 miles) from the telescope, and funnily enough, they are actually not watching the disappearance of the Moon.

These folks are watching the sunrise, which is happening right behind the photographer. To them, the faint morning Moon wouldn't appear any larger than normal.

Interesting . . . . .

You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out. All you need is to apply common sense with science to find a logical explanation.

If you are going to talk about light refraction you need to have some understanding of physics, otherwise you will just make a fool of yourself. Your theories don't work with known law of refraction and perspective. That's why you cannot demonstrate your claims, all you can do is more memes.

Once again you prove that you don't have a FE model. All you have is a general idea that the earth is flat with sun and moon hovering over it in circles. Then you explain everything away with weather effects, magic refraction and magic perspective. Your memes do not prove any of your claims. You aren't showing any calculations or demonstrations, just guessing things.

Furthermore your explanations are not consistent with any FE map. During the winter solstice the sun will be visible from Australia and South America at the same time while not visible from the north pole. How is that possible if there are less "miles of lineal atmosphere" from the sun to the north pole? Is air thicker around the north pole but only in December? 

How is it possible for sunset to occur at the same time in New York and Rio de Janeiro if one has many miles less of "lineal atmosphere"  to the sun than the other?



Your claims can't be taken seriously if you can't even show consistency of  your "miles of lineal atmosphere" with  known times for sunrise and sunset at different locations. For bonus points you could try to  explain 24h sunlight in Antarctica using "miles of lineal atmosphere".

Surface mirages are a common occurrence over oceans and lakes. These mirages block the view of objects with a mirror image of water near the surface. The mirage can be quite tall considering the conditions as seen in the pic below. Even a elevated landmass can be blocked from view.  So when do surface mirages apply to boats thought to be going over an alleged curved?

The WGS-84 model is understood and accepted universally. If you disagree please post a link to details.

You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out. All you need is to apply common sense with science to find a logical explanation.
 




With the right atmospheric conditions, one can view the Sun fade away above the horizon through the atmosphere bank. 

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

that's a really good point.
Care to explain why stars can be seen along the horizon?

Quote from: sokarul on August 02, 2019, 12:31:00 PM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 02, 2019, 10:03:11 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 02, 2019, 09:22:24 AM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 02, 2019, 08:59:22 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 02, 2019, 08:50:35 AM

Globe

Have you verified the alleged surface curvature of this Earth to use its alleged circumference as a reference point for sea curve anywhere and for a Globe? If not, why?

Science does not require me to preform every experiment.
Also it’s not proper to answer a question with a question.

It’s proper to know that the person who is trying to teach me has verified the foundation of their belief otherwise what good is their information? I don’t want to be led along blindly. However, if you have, I am willing to learn more and answer your questions. Verification is good science for such a belief as a Globe Earth.

You clearly don’t want to learn anything.

I like a lot of people have seen thing disappear behind the horizon. This is evidence for a round earth.

Yeah and the legs of this man and woman have also disappeared behind the curve. I saw it myself! It's true. Please believe me!

surface mirage

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 11, 2019, 02:29:39 PM

You don’t have to be an astronomer, scientist or mathematician to figure somethings out. All you need is to apply common sense with science to find a logical explanation.
 




With the right atmospheric conditions, one can view the Sun fade away above the horizon through the atmosphere bank. 

Flat Earth Sunset - Impossible on a Globe Earth

that's a really good point.
Care to explain why stars can be seen along the horizon?

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon. 

So, stars are much further away, with a fraction of the I tensity of the sun, but their light is not subject to your atmospheric conditions that obscure the sun?

Got it!

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon.

This "atmospheric bank" of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity.  What about the planets.  Are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn  immune to the atmospheric bank as well?

Things dimmer and farther away can be seen.
But not the thigs that are much closer and much brighter.

Ok.
Lets say it again.
Read carefully.

Things dimmer and farther away can be seen.
But not the thigs that are much closer and much brighter.

Very interesting.

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 12, 2019, 10:22:26 AM

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon.

This "atmospheric bank" of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity.  What about the planets.  Are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn  immune to the atmospheric bank as well?

The stars are all viewed within the circle area of the viewers horizon. It's only the Sun and Moon's light (being so low) that get's blocked by the atmosphere bank when's it beyond our circle area.  That's the way it works here on Plane Earth.

Quote from: kopfverderber on August 12, 2019, 11:50:32 AM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 12, 2019, 10:22:26 AM

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon.

This "atmospheric bank" of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity.  What about the planets.  Are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn  immune to the atmospheric bank as well?

The stars are all viewed within the circle area of the viewers horizon. It's only the Sun and Moon's light (being so low) that get's blocked by the atmosphere bank when's it beyond our circle area.  That's the way it works here on Plane Earth.

- How much lower are the moon and sun in relation to stars and planets?
- How tall is this atmospheric fog bank that supposedly exists everywhere on the planet with the exact same obscuring properties...everywhere?
- How could a star much farther way, on the same angle of sight near the horizon as the sun be seen through the atmospheric fog bank, yet the sun, closer and brighter, is invisible?

Quote from: kopfverderber on August 12, 2019, 11:50:32 AM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 12, 2019, 10:22:26 AM

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon.

This "atmospheric bank" of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity.  What about the planets.  Are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn  immune to the atmospheric bank as well?

The stars are all viewed within the circle area of the viewers horizon. It's only the Sun and Moon's light (being so low) that get's blocked by the atmosphere bank when's it beyond our circle area.  That's the way it works here on Plane Earth.

What evidence do you have for this "atmosphere bank"?  Could you diagram it on one of the FE maps?

but the stars on the horizon would be at the same low angle....
take that meme you copied.
extend the line waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out past the sun to a hypothetical star.
how the line of sight change?

Quote from: kopfverderber on August 12, 2019, 11:50:32 AM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 12, 2019, 10:22:26 AM

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon.

This "atmospheric bank" of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity.  What about the planets.  Are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn immune to the atmospheric bank as well?

The stars are all viewed within the circle area of the viewers horizon. It's only the Sun and Moon's light (being so low) that get's blocked by the atmosphere bank when's it beyond our circle area.  That's the way it works here on Plane Earth.

Nice hypothesis but as kopfverderber says "This 'atmospheric bank' of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity."

But that does not fit either because the moon, "Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn" all rise and set exactly as the sun does.

Here is a time-lapse of Venus rising before dawn:

Venus Rising by Ian Griffin
Published on Feb 19, 2016
A compilation of two timelapses taken on the morning of 20th Feb 2016 showing Venus and Mercury rising over Hoopers Inlet on the Otago Peninsula. All images by Ian Griffin. Music is "The Bluest Star" by the 126ers, downloaded from the YouTube audio library.

So, maybe it's "the way it works" there on your imaginary "Plane Earth" but it certainly does not work that way on the real world.

The WGS-84 model is understood and accepted universally. If you disagree please post a link to details.

I don't care. 

When do surface mirages apply to boats thought to be going over an alleged curved?

Surface mirages

I notice that you have yet again changed topic to avoid admitting defeat.
Why is that?

Do you have an explanation for why the sun sets and appears to remain the same size?
Do you have an explanation for why it casts light upwards near sunrise and sunset?

The mirage can be quite tall considering the conditions as seen in the pic below. Even a elevated landmass can be blocked from view.

As I pointed out before, you are yet to substantiate that claim in any way.
Which of the 2 is the one without the atmospheric effects changing what can be seen?
What were the tides like at the time?

Quote from: kopfverderber on August 12, 2019, 11:50:32 AM

Quote from: Plat Terra on August 12, 2019, 10:22:26 AM

The stars altitude is far above the Sun and they're not blocked by the atmosphere bank as the sun is (from viewer point) past the horizon. So the light of a star passes easily to the viewer through our area from just above the horizon.

This "atmospheric bank" of yours seems to very selective. It only hides things when you need it, ignoring distance and light intensity.  What about the planets.  Are Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn  immune to the atmospheric bank as well?

The stars are all viewed within the circle area of the viewers horizon. It's only the Sun and Moon's light (being so low) that get's blocked by the atmosphere bank when's it beyond our circle area.  That's the way it works here on Plane Earth.

Whatever that means. You have some issues to solve, here are some, but I'm sure there are many more:

- The sun is visible from places further away while it's night in places closer to the sun on the flat earth map. You are not addressing this point. Your atmospheric bank works rather inconsistent.
- We see Mercury and Venus before sunrise and after sunset. That's the light of sun reflected by the planets and going through the same atmospheric bank no problem.  Why? The atmospheric bank stops sunlight when it comes directly to us, but not when it's reflected by the planets?
- Atmospheric bank has no effect on stars, even stars near the horizon.
- Atmospheric bank doesn't stop Antarctica from getting midnight sun for months.