More and more experiments - Sorry RE-believers, you will lose (it)!

He deleted his account now.

Well, shoot! First JR and now this. Looks like Tom lost (it)! The unstoppable just stopped. Or did it? Time will tell.

We haven't seen cikljamas for a while, either, but I'm not sure about this new guy "Honest J". He seems to be sniffing around the zig-zag and midnight sun stuff that cikl was especially interested in. Giving cikljamas credit, though, several times he did build some apparatus and would actually try things and document what he was doing, unlike anyone else here that I can think of on that side of the argument.

I suggest in the meantime you are doing your own long distance observations and contribute to the worldwide flat earth community!

It's unstoppable!

Done, showed a curvature.
Also, I have used signal triangulation for satellite receivers that were personally verified by me, the signature of the signal was identical, meaning it was coming from the same location (this is the only weak point of my experiment since I do not have the ability to go to space and personally verify the physical satellite).  Also using just a LOS for the signal path to this same location will not all converge to a single spot at the same time when you do it without the curvature of the Earth taken into account.  If you assume it is flat then the signals do not converge.  Either way if just want to assume the Earth is flat, then you can use two signals calculate where they converge, depending on which ones you choose, it will converge near the equator at an altitude of somewhere in the neighborhood of 15000 to 40000 miles above the surface.  If you use the curvature of the Earth all the signals converge to a single point and the range of error for the satellite location is drastically reduced and gives you a 22000 mile altitude, error range ends up being around 3 or 4 hundred miles instead of 25000 miles.
So this is only a couple of experiments that I have done personally.  What have you done?  Other than guessing at a distance and saying that you could see more of something than you thought you should have.
Where is your actual data for your experiments?  What controls where put into place to reduce the error?  How did you verify your parameters? 
Given that you wish to disprove something already held as correct and supported by mathematics, where are your mathematical formulae that disproves the already verified math? 
Though I am sure someone shining a low power laser pointer over a body of water at night that they say is a certain number of miles when it looks to be about 1/2 or shorter.  No way to verify their stated distance, no way to verify the stated height above the water.  I guess its going to be this kind of stellar youtube videos that is gonna crack this conspiracy^TM wide open.