I just thought of the following simple question: If the Sun starts getting smaller and completely disappears at dusk due to perspective, how is it that we can still see the stars and planets on the firmament with our bare eyes, although they are farther away?

Oh and also, why can't the Sun be brought back into view with binoculars or a telescope when it disappears? This should be easy to do because it would just be hovering over the flat surface of Earth, right?

Is there an explanation for this?

I really don't get how the Sun would work like a spotlight, only lighting a specific conical area beneath it.

That’s because it gets far enough away and you throw atmosphere into the mix.  Record photographs are about 300 miles away with the best equipment and even those are extremely blurry.  If the sun gets a few thousand miles away, then you can forget about seeing it.

Those mountains photographed from 300 miles away should have been hidden by about 40,000 feet of curvature ... higher than most airplanes fly.

1. Idealized? No, you're saying math is wrong. Where is the disclaimer by ANY globe-defending organization that those earth curvature calculations are "ideal"? Where does any mainstream scientist deny the curvature drop given by those calculations?

2. Mirages are mirages. They aren't MAGIC like some kind of magic wand or photoshop tool, to magically erase the earth's curvature or bulge, bringing entire city skylines up a hundred miles around the "curved" earth, making them appear perfectly straight up, with no waviness or distortion. Sorry, I'm not buying the crap you're selling. There are no "Refraction Fairies" that magically make the globe earth appear EXACTLY as if it were flat. Give me a break.

3. "All distant objects", "all the time". How about we start with ONE bit of evidence for this. Nothing from NASA though, for they are proven liars. One of the reasons Globe Earth can't be true. Why would NASA lie so much and go through so much time/effort/expense to deceive us, if all they had to do was take real, honest pictures and tell the truth?

So this is all about the "we shouldn't see this thing" argument.
Every single time this is used, it's about objects that are suspiciously close, so the numbers are easy to fudge, and they're always above water, so you can talk about refractive effects to convince people that don't know how refraction works.

I challenge you (the FE community) to show something over land that is far away, say 1,000 miles. You can use binoculars, telescopes, whatever you want.

Same goes for the boats that disappear out of view. You can zoom in all you want, they keep disappearing bottom up. Demonstratably, all the time, everywhere. And this is over water, with all kinds of reflections and refractions by air layers going on.

Did you ever want to walk around in a Flat Earth universe simulation?

Use this: https://www.glowscript.org/#/user/Bruce_Sherwood/folder/Pub/program/FlatEarth

Here's it's author, Bruce Sherwood, explaining the inconsistencies this has with real life observations:



This is what happens when you really take the flat Earth model views seriously (as opposed to the usual ridicule) and trace out the consequences. There are still tons of huge inconsistencies that cannot be simply laughed off.

Funny. Because most videogames these days are made on a flat plane. Even ones like No Man's Sky which transfers spherical planets to flat maps once you load into the atmosphere. It's almost as if it's more logical to build on a flat plane. 

  What's classy about Bart ****erberg?  He's a Rothschild, developed FB with the c.1.a and now runs it as a quasi-media org with censorship and 1st amendment protections all around...all the while, making billions. 

And what's his newest idea?  Simulations and virtual reality.  This is the next step from the joos, the elites, the global satanic pedophile club. 

Simulations are bogus, not real life and a waste of time...

Funny. Because most videogames these days are made on a flat plane. Even ones like No Man's Sky which transfers spherical planets to flat maps once you load into the atmosphere. It's almost as if it's more logical to build on a flat plane.

Most but not all. Most video games don't need anything but a flat game world. Games like No Man's Sky and Elite Dangerous actually have spherical planets - do you have any more information on this regarding No Man's sky? It's for sure easier to do the required Maths on a flat plane, yes.

Wow, that's some great stuff.  I think it might be the same guy who did the following video (I posted it before).  He used photogrammetry software (considered to be extremely accurate) here to show how the earth is perfectly flat.

Incredible. Game over. No surprise. The earth is not a globe. 

So in another video he says he was an engineer who worked on RF stuff dealing with satellites.  So this guy knows his stuff.

He really seems to be a bright guy in some regards, I definitely agree on that.

This makes me wonder even more how he can fall for something like flat Earth.

Let's just start at the basics again. I won't answer to any other point in this thread except anything regarding the following. This video debunks flat Earth. You can't explain our observations he references in the video using the flat Earth model. Every other point you bring up in support of flat Earth is moot if this single counterargument is true.


Otherwise this will just be a constant waste of time in a pointless discussion filled with "whataboutism" with one strawman argument hunting the next.

Let's just start at the basics again. I won't answer to any other point in this thread except anything regarding the following. This video debunks flat Earth.

Lay down the law and the rules of the discussion, bro!  Yessir!  Show 'em you're in charge!  That oughta make people interested in engaging you! 

There are plenty of videos debunking this or that.  When offering some supposedly end-all-be-all vid, it might be wiser to NOT do so like a completely close-minded know-it-all.  Doing so naturally and understandably makes most, if not all, people think that discussing anything with you is a complete waste of time.  It doesn't help that the previous list you posted was mostly childish nonsense, but you likely thought it was rock-solid stuff.  Oh well.  Do as you must.  Godspeed.