Mountains on the Moon

I have heard many flat earth folks claim that you cannot see mountains more than a couple of hundred miles away because air is not truly transparent.  If this were the only reason, then why can I clearly see mountains on the surface of the moon if it's 3000 miles away as you claim?   

air is not truly transparent in ground level. After 20kms high there is almost no air and the remained air is clear. 20kms far, 200kms far or 3000 miles far has same clearness if you look through upside.

I have heard many flat earth folks claim that you cannot see mountains more than a couple of hundred miles away because air is not truly transparent.  If this were the only reason, then why can I clearly see mountains on the surface of the moon if it's 3000 miles away as you claim?

Yes, they do claim that you can't see more than a few hundred miles through the air, but only if that sight path is down low, like looking at a mountain or the setting sun, because the air is more dense and has more water dissolved in it down low, because it's warmer.

So if the mountain was 500 miles straight above you, only a small portion of that sight path is through the dense air, the rest is through very thin air.

Tom Foolery, this is FE Q&A. If you want to provide FE A's to FE Q's, all is good. Your last paragraph belongs in FE Debate.

Tom Foolery, this is FE Q&A. If you want to provide FE A's to FE Q's, all is good. Your last paragraph belongs in FE Debate.

Thanks & Fixed!

air is not truly transparent in ground level. After 20kms high there is almost no air and the remained air is clear. 20kms far, 200kms far or 3000 miles far has same clearness if you look through upside.

The moon rises and sets. What's happening when it's at horizon level, and I can still see mountains and craters on it?

To make it more specific, I live in Northern England on the coast. I have watched the moon rise over the sea. How can I see the mountains and craters on the moon, but not also see the much closer mountains in Norway, on the other side of the North Sea?

Have you really never driven away from a mountain?

The fact that the Moon is often crisp and clear while mountains only 10 miles away are foggy and discolored is a piece of evidence that the visible Moon is a projection upon the atmolayer.

Why the shift towards a projection? And also not a dome?

The celestial bodies are described as projections upon the atmolayer in Earth Not a Globe. Distant lights will often magnify and maintain their sizes, as in the case of these distant street lamps:

https://vimeo.com/342791916

The lamps in the far field appear to be the same size into the distance as they recede.

It is sometimes asserted that the above effects are caused by glare. This assertion invokes an apparent absurdity, however: to explain the observation of consistent sizes an enlarging glare would need to seemingly intellegintly adjust itself in size, in accordance to the shrinking with perspective and distance to the observer, in order to make the bodies the same size into the distance.

If glare at position A is making bodies x2 its size, for example, a body 8x smaller at 8 times distance from position A would be required to have a glare of 16x to match the glare at position A, which is eight fold increase of the initial ratio. It is questionable how 'glare' could know where the observer is, in order to cause bodies to maintain their exact sizes into the distance.

The fact that the Moon is often crisp and clear while mountains only 10 miles away are foggy and discolored is a piece of evidence that the visible Moon is a projection upon the atmolayer.

On what part of the atmolayer would a "crisp and clear" projection be possible?

Also, how do you project onto the atmolayer in the first place?

Im confused as to what stance tomB has.

In the Plata thread he is pushing glare and refraction and it is sun related.

Here, is a projection issue and moon related.

Why there two systems if both bodies are up in the sky?

The celestial bodies are described as projections upon the atmolayer, blah blah

Who is projecting, from where, powered by what and why would they?

The projection of the Sun onto the atmoplane is official explantation in Earth Not a Globe and both Wikis on both FES websites. You can read about it here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset

Take a magnifying glass to text on a piece of paper. The lens rebroadcasts the photons to a slightly different position. It's as if an image is projected upon the surface of the magnifying glass -- An example of a projection onto a transparent medium.

The projection of the Sun onto the atmoplane is official explantation in Earth Not a Globe and both Wikis on both FES websites. You can read about it here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset

Take a magnifying glass to text on a piece of paper. The lens rebroadcasts the photons to a slightly different position. It's as if an image is projected upon the surface of the magnifying glass -- An example of a projection onto a transparent medium.

I think that the word you're looking for is "refracts", not "rebroadcasts".  And no, the image isn't being projected upon the surface of the magnifying glass any more than an image of the paper is being projected onto the eyeglasses that many people wear.

Also keep in mind that a magnifying glass is a solid material, the atmoplane is not.  In fact, the atmoplane gets less and less substantial the higher you go, so what is there to project the image of the sun and moon onto?

This is not the place to debate, folks.