We can only see in a circle. Optics can only see in the radius of a circle.
Prove it.
There is no evidence of any limit to human vision.
If there was such a limit, you would not be able to see further by going higher.
So if we could only see to a distance of 5 km, we should only see 5 km. Going higher shouldn't then allow the horizon to be much further away.
Also importantly, we live in 3D, not 2D, so we should be seeing the radius of a sphere.
That means objects well above our head, like the sun, shouldn't be visible at all.
So this idea is clearly pure nonsense.
The farthest we can see is straight ahead, anything left to right is pulled back.
No, even with your idea, anything to the left or right will have the same distance.
If we can see in a circle, we can see the same distance all around.
If you apply curvature math of a alleged 3959 mile radius to this horizon or any other, the Globe Earth theory fails and the hoax is exposed.
You mean it can actually explain what is observed rather than relying upon nonsense like our vision magically being limited to a circle?
That isn't exposing a hoax, that is supporting a theory with evidence.
I am working on a post that shows the Suez Canal can’t exist on a Globe Earth, but for now I would like to point out the following.
You mean rather than admit your dishonesty or accept that you were wrong, you will just jump topic again and spout more nonsense.
We are under no obligation to verify the curvature for you, especially not in any particular location. Like I have said, it has been verified plenty of times.
If you want to defeat a RE you can't just say you don't accept the evidence that is already there, or even just appeal to a lack of a particular piece of evidence. You need to show an actual problem.
Where are your measurements of the Panama Canal or the Suez Canal or something to show there is no curve?
So far all you have provided is ignorance and lies. None of that defeats the RE.
If you want to show that the Suez Canal isn't curved, then provide the measurements showing that it is flat, including all the details of how they were obtained.
Topographic maps report height relative to sea level, not some arbitrary flat plane which makes no sense to use as there is literally no justification for any particular plane.
Ignoring definitions of level which don't suit your agenda doesn't help you either.
I guess that means you reject spirit levels and other forms of levels as well, because they don't fit the definition you have cherry picked?
As for you latest strawman, that curvature you are appealing to is effectively nothing.
Again, stop using different units.
You are appealing to a 216 archaic unit drop over a distance of 190080 archaic units.
That is a fractional drop of 0.001.
That is basically nothing.
This is a too scale diagram of just what that should look like:
Not very different from a straight line is it?
But more importantly, THAT ISN'T WHAT YOU SHOULD SEE!
That is a great circle of Earth, the curve going all the way around.
You will see part of that when looking straight ahead, but it then doesn't follow the horizon.
Unless you are infinitely far away from Earth, that great circle will be hidden by the horizon.
Instead what you should see is the horizon being at the same angle of dip all around.
So you shouldn't even see that curve.
So again, it isn't surprising that the RE community wont accept defeat when you haven't even begun to defeat them.
So far all you have done is posted a collection of lies and repeated the same claims of ignorance.
People not verifying the curvature doesn't mean the curvature isn't real, and again, plenty of people have verified the curvature.
Making factually incorrect claims about pictures and videos doesn't refute the RE.
Do you have any actual problem with the RE, as I am yet to see you present one.
And like I said, if you really want to defeat REers you should provide an alternative model that works better.
Plenty of observations are consistent with a RE and inconsistent with everything else except nature conspiring to make Earth look round.