It doesn't matter what scope you use, you will never ever....ever, see any horizon line on your globe.
So you are back to claiming the horizon wouldn't exist and instead you would just magically see sky?
If not, then like I have shown repeatedly, it is highly dependent upon 3 factors:
The radius of Earth
The height of the observer
The FOV of the scope.
As a simple extreme example, a scope with a FOV of 180 degrees, with you basically right on the surface of Earth,
It doesn't matter how you try to dress it up by trying to use a FOV right on a surface. The reality is very simple.
Yes, the reality is very simple, all three factors above matter.
Repeatedly lying and it doesn't, with no justification at all, just shows you don't care about the truth at all.
You will always have level converged sight to your horizon. It has to be that. It cannot be anything else.....ever.
Except in the plenty of examples you have been provided which clearly shows it doesn't.
Again, all the evidence indicates the horizon is a physical phenomenon due to an actual edge of Earth, not perspective or convergence.
You are yet to provide any justification at all for your outright lie that it cannot be anything other than a magically level horizon.
The fact we have an horizon at all totally destroys the globe you think we live on for reasons I've stated, time and time and time, again.
Wrong again. A horizon is 100% consistent with a RE.
The fact that it is a physical horizon, a literal edge of Earth, rather than just a result of perspective or just the sky and ground/sea blurring into one another means it can't be at all from a FE. So like so many of your claims, the reality is the exact opposite. The fact that we have a horizon at all totally destroys your FE nonsense.
Additionally you haven't stated reasons. You have stated outright lies which are effectively just repeating the same assertion again and again.
You have provided no reason at all for why a RE cannot have a horizon.
The closest you have come to doing so is effectively claiming a RE would be invisible as you would see nothing but sky.
But that will killed when you admitted that looking straight down would result in you seeing Earth.
Saying Earth curves down doesn't mean there can't be a horizon. That is the very thing that results in a horizon.
So just where is your explanation that a RE cannot have a horizon?
Once more, you have been provided with a logical argument which clearly shows that your claims about a RE not having a horizon, it being impossible and it not appearing in a level scope to be nothing more than blatant lies.
If you want to have any chance of honestly pretending that you have provided reasons you need to deal with this argument, otherwise, claiming you have justified your position is also a blatant lie.
Once more:
1 - Looking down you see ground/sea, i.e. EARTH.
2 - Looking up you see sky.
3 - That means if you started out looking down and slowly raised your head, your would see some kind of transition between ground/sea and sky.
4 - Assuming there isn't anything getting in your way, this transition would be a line; below this line you would see ground/sea and above this line you would see sky.
5 - This is just like if you look at a basketball. You can see a line, "below" this line you see the ball, "above" this line you see the surroundings.
6 - This line would be the horizon for a round earth. So now the question becomes where is this line?
7 - Simple trig shows that the relationship between this angle, as measured from level, the radius of the ball, and your distance/height from the surface is:
cos(a)=r/(r+h).
8 - Doing the math for a RE when you are 2 m above it shows the horizon would only be 2.7 arc minutes below level, i.e. imperceptibly different from level, and entirely consistent with what is observed.
And once more, the fact you continually avoid this argument, being completely incapable of a single thing wrong with it, shows you almost certainly know that you are blatantly lying to everyone. It shows you almost certainly know that the RE does have a horizon, and that when close to Earth it will appear to be level.
Now why don't you stop just repeating the same lies and deal with the argument, either identifying what point you think is wrong and why it is wrong; or by admitting you have been lying to everyone and that a RE would produce a horizon which would be visible in a level scope depending on the conditions?
You ball of any size would always curve downwards and away from you. That's it.
Yes, eventually curving down such that it obstructs the view to the more distant parts of it, creating a horizon.
This is different to a flat surface, where it doesn't obstruct the view at all, making a horizon impossible.
Again, this shows a FE can't have a horizon while a RE must have a horizon.
Assuming it was possible to have a sky envelope the globe you think you are on, then you would look directly level in front of you and see nothing but sky.
Again, only true with a FOV of 0, which would simply mean you see nothing.
As soon as you have a non-0 FOV you need to consider just where the horizon would be.
And that is something you have repeatedly refused to do, likely because you know it shows you are wrong.
Again, if you have a FOV of 180 degrees, just what do you think you would see on a RE?
Still nothing but sky, even though you have already admitted that you would see ground when looking straight down (which is included in the 180 degree FOV?
You do not live on a globe,a s far as I'm concerned
Yes, you live in a fantasy land, with no connection to reality.
It isn't simply my belief that we live on a globe. It is what all the available evidence indicates, with no evidence indicating otherwise.