« Reply #60 on: September 30, 2007, 08:31:42 PM »
According to this book, it says that the ship sinking effect cannot be used as proof to a round Earth.
Well yes, the effect cannot be used as proof for a Round Earth because the apparent sinking is reversible once the scene is looked at through a telescope with sufficient magnification. From Chapter 9 of Zetetic Cosmogony:--
When a ship or any other object recedes from the observer on a level surface the highest part is always seen last by reason of perspective. So that the masts and sails of a receding vessel on a flat surface should he seen long after the hull has become invisible to the naked eye. Besides this law of perspective, the hull of a vessel is generally of a dark color, and often at a very short distance disappears to the naked eye, because it has lost its individuality in the mass of surrounding water, both hull and water being nearly of the same color. It appears to have mingled with the water, and is thus lost to sight. The hull has no background whatever, but the mast and sails have a splendid background against the sky and stand out to advantage, and are, for this reason also, seen long after the hull has vanished. But that the hull has not "gone down behind a hill of water" because the globular is in error, which has been proven by the writer many times.
At Capetown, sometime ago, I made special experiments with a view to arrive at the truth of the matter. On one occasion I watched the schooner Lilla, of Capetown, sail away north, bound to Saldanha Bay, Instead of gradually going down the hill of water-the observer always being on the highest part-she appeared to ascend an inclined plane until she reached the level of my eye-perhaps 100 feet above sea level-and then gradually diminished in size, Soon her hull disappeared-it was painted black-and her masts and sails became smaller and smaller every minute. I then applied a binocular to the eye, and saw her hull plainly enough, It remained in sight until the individuality of the vessel's parts were lost in the distance.
If the earth were a globe and the receding vessel were really "rounding the curve" then it would be impossible to restore a half-sunken ship by simply looking at it through a telescope. There should be a hill of water in the way, blocking the hull of the ship under every zoom. Hence, we see that the globular proof of sinking ships is in error, that the earth is a plane, that the sinking effect is purely perceptual in nature.
We know that this account is false.
One need only read The RE Primer, in particular Experiment #0013--kudos to Trekky, for proof. Here's the great photos of the Toronto skyline that Trekky provided in another thread: (BTW TomB's refutation was that Lake Ontario has tides over a hundred feet--and just at the time of photos!)
Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?