If water level won't convince you then nothing will.
It does convince me, as repeatedly explained.
The fact that the bottom of a distant object (such as a building) is obscured by the water, even though both myself and the distant object are well above water, clearly shows that this level water is curved.
However, if your Earth is the globe you believe it to be then you understand that.... you..... looking level should clearly understand that your globe, underfoot will curve down and away from that vision with every inch, no matter how small the curve would be.
No, if Earth is the pathetic strawman you make it out to be it will.
But in reality, as repeatedly explained to you, there are 2 competing effects.
There is perspective which makes things appear higher, and the curvature of Earth which makes things appear lower.
Over short distances, perspective wins. It is massive compared to the curvature of Earth.
Over much much greater distances, the curvature wins.
The point where this crosses over is the horizon.
If your pure BS was correct, every single ball in existence would appear as nothing more than a tiny point in your vision.
The fact they don't shows you are spouting pure garbage.
Again, can you answer the simple questions which show this claim of yours is pure BS:
Again, what magic prevents us seeing the RE?
Again, If you have a tube, 1 inch in a diameter and 10 inches long, with this tube level and you looking through the tube with your eye at the midpoint of the tube's height and directly against the end of the tube, how far below the tube can an object at 1 mile distance be, in order to still be visible through the tube?
Can you see the base of a tree at 1 mile distance, if the base of the tree is 6 ft below the level of the tube?
And no, appealing to a curve is not answering it unless you are going to claim that you cannot see ANYTHNG at all below the tube, regardless of how far away it is.
So if you want that to be your tactic, clearly state that so everyone can then reference to show just how wrong you are and how you are willing to use whatever dishonest BS you can to pretend the RE has a problem.
This is why standing on a downward gradient with level tube set up, shows there would be no view of the ground beneath
No, this is not why for anything, except why we know you are spouting BS.
It is nothing more than your pathetic assertion which requires completely rejecting the idea of perspective or as you like to call it "convergence".
It requires the false belief that if something is below the level of the tube it is impossible to see.
This is why you avoid such simple questions, because you know they expose the BS your blatant lies rely upon.
You can do this experiment over 12 feet, no problem.
Which makes it nothing like your simple claim of a simple tube.
Remeber, you claimed you could do this with a simple kitchen roll tube held up to your eye.
But now you have changed it from such a simple setup to one which is ~12 times the length.
I put out a simple experiment and a back up to ensure no cheating.
No, you put out a simple experiment, it showed that you were wrong, so you dismissed it as fake and threw in a bunch of needless complications so you can pretend you aren't just rejecting everything that shows you are wrong.
Soooo, how in the hell would anyone expect to see the ground from thats et up?
By understanding how vision works.
By understanding that if you look through a 1 inch tube at a distant object, you can see more than 1 inch of it.
It doesn't matter if you want to call it perspective, or convergence or some other BS, the simple fact is you CAN see more than just 1 inch.
This means as long as the slope isn't too great, you WILL be able to see it after enough distance.
The real question is how in the hell would anyone expect to be incapable of seeing the ground through a level tube from a tiny downwards gradient after they have already accepted they could see it on a flat surface?
Again, this is why you continually avoid answering simple questions.
You know that answering them will expose you as a liar.
The horizon does not use a surface
It uses the surface of Earth.
The theoretical line is your convergence from your view over distance.
Which is infinitely far away and not the horizon seen on Earth.
Very simple experiments and logical thoughts are all that's required to scupper any global model people have been bullied into accepting.
There you go lying yet again.
Very simple experiments and logical thought are that is required to scupper your BS.
Simply looking through a tube at any distant object is enough to scupper your BS lies regarding the inability to see the ground.
But even logical thought is enough for that.
The tube doesn't magically bend the light. All it does is restrict your FOV.
That means you can still see the ground, no matter how much you want to lie and claim you can't.
You are yet to provide a single thing which in any way actually challenges the globe.
Sure you continually lie by claiming to provide things which do, but again, simple experiments and logic shows that they are lies.
Simple questions which you continually refuse to answer shows that you know they are lies.
And you repeatedly contradicting yourself as you twist your position back and forth to avoid admitting these lies shows your character.
Many, including yourself, will never dare to question that because ridicule is not something you could take much of, in my opinion.
And like so many of your opinions, that is just another blatant lie.
Many, including myself, do question it, but find that the globe model answers our questions. That means we don't just reject it.
You don't question the globe.
Questioning implies a willingness to accept an answer.
You just outright reject the globe and come up with whatever pathetic BS you can to pretend that rejection is justified.
It leaves you struggling.
The only one struggling here is you.
You are struggling so much, you refuse to answer extremely simple questions.
are looking level when you focus upon that horizon.
Again, the evidence already provided shows that is wrong.
But that is the kind of dishonest circular reasoning you would use to prop up your lies.