Like I said before; standing on a basketball would be standing on your Earth.
And like so many things you say, that is an outright lie.
Standing on a basketball, is vastly different to standing on Earth due to the scale involved.
Standing on Earth, 2 m high, you stand only a fraction of the radius above Earth.
But standing on a basketball 2 m high, you stand many times the radius.
Standing on a basketball is like standing 53 000 km above Earth.
The basketball (assuming it holds your weight to stay spherical) would curve down from under your vision, whether you're 6 feet above it or 6 inches and looking horizontally level.
No, it doesn't.
It highly depends upon your height above it.
This means when close enough you do get an edge and do get a horizon.
Again, if you disagree then tell us where this edge would be.
Forget looking out level, start looking down and lift your head up until you reach the edge. Where would it be?
this can only happen if the judges have the facts that prove a naivety and assuming they aren't being naive, themselves.
Which makes you useless as a judge.
If you don't think it's clear then find a way to help yourself by asking the questions that may make it more clear.
For you to just ignore those questions because they show your claims are pure garbage?
I have asked plenty of questions to "make it more clear" as have plenty of others.
But when an honest answer to these questions would require you to admit you are wrong, you just ignore it or find some pathetic excuse to dismiss it.
I'm not saying it's all bad but schooling should be clear enough in terms of stating facts, fictions or theories.
Do you mean facts like Earth is round, as opposed to your blatant lies?
The problem is some things cannot be questioned. You know this.
That would be religion. With science, anything can be questioned, but questioned isn't the same as discarded.
The problem for you is that no FEers can provide any problems for the RE that the FE can solve.
Instead all they have are the same pathetic lies and strawmen.
If I had to show you then I'd draw
Don't tell us what you would draw, actually draw it.
Again, here is a template to get you started:
It is for a 180 degree vertical FOV.
It already has the ground (in green) and the sky (in light blue).
As for the rest of that nonsense, once more ignoring the effect of perspective doesn't magically mean it doesn't exist.
It still does, and ignoring it to pretend a RE can't have a horizon would be just as dishonest as ignoring the curve.
You need to consider both effects.
At short range, perspective wins and Earth appears higher in your FOV. At long range, the curve wins.
The horizon is at the crossover point.
Again, the simple argument, which you have continually ignored, shows beyond any doubt that you are wrong:
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.
9 - This means if you were to look through a level scope, which is positioned at 2 m above level, with a FOV >= 5.4 arc minutes, you would see the horizon on the globe.
Likewise, this simple image shows that you are wrong:
The Earth is curving down, away from the line of sight, yet perspective still allows it to appear in your FOV.
The only way you can pretend to have an argument against the RE is if you claim perspective cannot makes things appear higher, but then it is also an argument against the FE.