If we were living on a spinning globe airplane's would constantly have to dip their noses down every few minutes to compensate for the curvature of the earth (with a circuмference of 25,000 miles the earth would be constantly curving at the speed of an airplane). In reality however, they never do this! They learn how to fly based on a level flat plane. Also if the earth was spinning the airplane's going west would get to their destination much faster since the earth is spinning in the opposite direction. If the atmosphere is spinning with the earth then airplanes flying west would have to fly faster than the earth's spin to reach its destination. In reality, the earth is flat and airplanes just fly level and reach their destination easily because the earth is not moving.

Neil,
They have not been debunked at all. Please provide references of this so called debunking. Everybody is still waiting for you to explain where the missing 500 feet went to in the first video. You just didn't respond, so it stands to reason you won't even look at the other two.

These provide proof that there is no curvature on the flat earth.
Being paid, most likely, for your contributions here on Cathinfo, you have a vested interest in saying silly, unsubstantiated things like this. Throw enough mud and some of it will stick.

.
Okay, kiwiboy-with-alzheimer's, here you are for the THIRD TIME, the notes I provided for you two weeks ago:
.
.
I did reply to questions about this video, with the people walking down the stairs and the measurement from Miramar Beach to Anacapa island.
.
At the start, it begins with a very important inaccuracy, where it has the Camera Height at 3 feet. This is obviously false. You can easily see that the camera is on the sandy beach with rocky pebbles, high above the surf line. The camera might be 3 feet above the sand, but that place on the sand is at least 8 feet above the water level of the ocean, so the camera height is more like 11 feet, not 3 feet.
.
For the next 2 minutes, the video uses this fake beginning as a basis for drawing conclusions, but they're all fake because it started with a wrong elevation.
.
At minute 2 he could easily have had a helper hold a long stick vertically standing at the water's edge (in surveying it's called a Philadelphia Rod - see insert pic) going up to the line of the horizon, and then go measure how high that is (or read the markings on the rod). He doesn't do that because it would show that the camera's height is much greater than the 3 feet that he erroneously claims it is.
.
At 2:47, without explaining what's going on, he suddenly shows footage shot from the top of a hill somewhere and has, "I will compare with this image from 560 ft elevation view." Pause the video at minute 3:00 and pay close attention to the low point of the island on the right side, between West Anacapa and Middle Anacapa. You can clearly see the land of the islands coming to a low point and briefly touching the water line, which is the small channel between the two islands. This is the portion of the shot that he eliminates in a few seconds by scrolling up...
.
Then, to compound his error, at minute 3:13 you can see how he scrolls up the picture to eliminate the lower portion of his view, cutting off the bottom part of the island that you could easily see a few seconds before, and he pretends that's the water line viewed from a higher elevation at the beach. But it's not. It is his cropped picture that cuts off the part you could see plainly a few seconds before, at 3:00. Then the cropped picture wiggles up and down for all to see, and at at 3:32 he labels his arbitrary image "View from 560 ft. elevation" when it's not that at all. He just isn't showing the bottom 500 feet of the island!! He has falsified his own view to make it appear to support his bias. It's so obviously a deliberate distortion.
.
Then he says, "LET'S TRY SEA LEVEL" at 3:40, and starts walking down to the water's edge. At 3:57 (pause it to see) halfway down to the water, the top of a surfer's head is touching the horizon line at the distant island's base. That is the point at which the camera is 5 feet above the water, because the surfer's head is 5 feet above the water's surface -- he is standing on his surfboard with his feet at the water's level and he's about 5 feet tall.
.
At 4:03 he puts his camera down on the sand and you can easily see how the standing surfer out in the water is now with his head up against the sky. The surfer did not rise up, but the camera did lower down, and this lower angle of view changes the appearance of the surfer against the water. You can't see the water surface anymore because it's hidden by the breaking waves.
.
Then at 4:15 the same surfer is shown falling off his surfboard, so you know it's not fake. This is real footage, which is nice to see.
.
At 4:29 the wave washes up toward the camera and you can see the top of the water. The camera is obviously higher than the water's surface (mean sea level) or else you wouldn't be able to see the surface. The fact is, as the waves rush up the sand, the water moves uphill, and the furthest extent of the water's edge is ABOVE sea level by a few feet. This is always the case on the shoreline with breaking waves.
.
If he put his camera down at sea level it would get ruined by the water covering it up, and we wouldn't be seeing any picture at all. Like a periscope on a submarine that isn't quite out of the water yet or gets splashed by a wave.
.
All the way past minute 6 the camera shows views of the water's surface out to sea, proving that the camera is at 3' elevation, or even higher. But he pretends it's at 0, which is clearly false.
.
At 6:00 to 6:08 a surfer paddles past the camera's line of sight, with his head and body entirely below the water's surface in the distance. You would not be able to see that if the camera were at water level. The camera is above water level by at least 3 feet, perhaps 4 feet.
.
.
.
But you're not paying attention,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
.

.

.
Why are Moslems insulted when someone says the earth is not flat?
.
Moslems are insulted because they believe they have to FACE MECCA several times every day to pray, and if the earth were flat, facing Mecca would be a simple matter of asking your local imam which way it is to Mecca, and after he tells you, then that's the way you have to face every day when you're in that region. 
.
But with a spherical earth, the direction to Mecca can be rather controversial, because depending on how you want to explain it, you can say you're facing Mecca in just about any direction. Some directions might require you to travel several times around the world in a spiral fashion but eventually you'll be arriving at Mecca. You have the great circle route, or you have the method by which any two points on the globe's surface can be connected with an array of circular and/or semi-circular meridian-like lines, the layout of which is rotating about the two points. Certainly it's very simple to imagine if Mecca were at the South Pole and the Moslem far away were at the North Pole, any  direction he faces would be the correct direction to Mecca. These two points are on opposite sides of the planet earth, and similarly there can be the same relationship drawn up for any two circuмpolar points on the spherical planet. But the route you're taking to Mecca doesn't necessarily have to be a great circle route, which (by the way) traveling would require you to constantly change your compass bearing unless you're on the same meridian. If, for example, you're on the same parallel, you could be facing Mecca by simple facing east -- or west! So then some Moslems would be facing to the left and some to the right and then they'd be facing each other instead of (properly) facing into each other's rear ends!! That would not be very much in accord with traditional practice whereby all Moslems must be facing into the rear ends of other Moslems except perhaps for the ones in the front row. In any event, being on the same parallel would mean you face, let's say west, and if you were to travel that way, you would not be going over a great circle route but rather a circuмference somewhat smaller than the great circle route, depending on how far Mecca is from the equator.
.
The point is, Mohammedans want the earth to be flat (a falsehood) so that they can practice their false religion (a falsehood).
.

.

There is no model of flat-earthism that explains this relationship of the sun's light to the earth's surface.
.

                       

Holy moly, you are stubborn AND dumb like a mule.
The angles of the sun's rays and perspective are fully explained in the video by P-brane. But I suppose you don't pay attention to anything a flat earther posts. 
.
,..
The sun's angles at sunset appear "sideways" to you at your location due to perspective, because at both dawn and sunset the sun is at its GREATEST distance from you, e.g. 1-10 degrees, whereras at noon the sun is at its closest distance to you at its zenith, i.e. 90 degrees.
.
It is the same thing as when you look at a protractor: *you* are at "zero". Dawn in the east is at 1-10 degrees, noon is at 90 degrees, and sunset is in the west at 180 degrees.
.
It is the exact same principle in both the spring and the fall. Ever wonder why the quality of the suns' light is SO HARSH and seems to be coming at you SIDEWAYS at those times of year?? It's because they sun is LITERALLY and PHYSICALLY further to the north (spring) and south (fall) and so the angles are lower due to the greater distance. 
.
You could literally demonstrate this for yourself with your salt shaker on the surface of your dinner table with a protractor, if you do not understand.

.
It has nothing to do with the sun's "proximity" but rather it is in regards to the angle of the sun's orbit above the equator, regardless of the distance to the sun.
.
In the summer (northern hemisphere) the sun orbits the earth at the tropic of cancer, and from that position is barely visible from the position of the north pole.
.

.

 

You cannot accept this hybrid model of heliocentrism and geocentrism. The earth is NOT tilted. It is stable and DOES NOT MOVE. Straight from God's Word in the Bible.
Who hast founded the earth upon its own bases: it shall not be moved for ever and ever. Ps. 104:5
And the sun in your heliocentric/93-Millions hybrid would be whizzing by us at 24 MILLION miles per hour. That is NOT what you see in the sky.

Holy moly, you are stubborn AND dumb like a mule.
The angles of the sun's rays and perspective are fully explained in the video by P-brane. But I suppose you don't pay attention to anything a flat earther posts.
.
,..
The sun's angles at sunset appear "sideways" to you at your location due to perspective, because at both dawn and sunset the sun is at its GREATEST distance from you, e.g. 1-10 degrees, whereras at noon the sun is at its closest distance to you at its zenith, i.e. 90 degrees.
.
It is the same thing as when you look at a protractor: *you* are at "zero". Dawn in the east is at 1-10 degrees, noon is at 90 degrees, and sunset is in the west at 180 degrees.
.
It is the exact same principle in both the spring and the fall. Ever wonder why the quality of the suns' light is SO HARSH and seems to be coming at you SIDEWAYS at those times of year?? It's because they sun is LITERALLY and PHYSICALLY further to the north (spring) and south (fall) and so the angles are lower due to the greater distance.
.
You could literally demonstrate this for yourself with your salt shaker on the surface of your dinner table with a protractor, if you do not understand.

. 
Anyone reading your reply, above, would have no idea what the topic is. Because you are not addressing the topic, as usual.
.
You resort to uncharitable name-calling instead. Shame on you.
.
Whether the protractor is seen at 0 degrees, 90 degrees or 180 degrees the distance to the center is identical.
.
The sun cannot illuminate half the earth at all times in the flat-earth model as you say it does, and the sun would always be visible all over the earth when it's immediately above it, as you claim.
.
Now answer the questions you keep avoiding -- or keep avoiding them and thereby answer by saying you won't answer.
.

.
Notice no answers from flat-earthers.
.
They really are repulsed by these questions, like they're radioactive or giving off terrible sound waves.
.
They must be really scary.
.

.
Still no answer?
.
Must be really scary.
.

You cannot accept this hybrid model of heliocentrism and geocentrism. The earth is NOT tilted. It is stable and DOES NOT MOVE. Straight from God's Word in the Bible.
Who hast founded the earth upon its own bases: it shall not be moved for ever and ever. Ps. 104:5
And the sun in your heliocentric/93-Millions hybrid would be whizzing by us at 24 MILLION miles per hour. That is NOT what you see in the sky.

.
I agree with you that the diagram is not just right, since it shows the sun rays always going horizontally and the earth's axis tilting.
.
But all you have to do is imagine the earth's axis remaining straight up and down and the sun's rays changing angle instead, using the same diagrams.
.
In any case, the angle of the sun's light changes over the year just as these images show, if one's view is from outer space with the sun always kept to the same direction.
.
All the diagrams I could find show the earth changing its axis direction, which actually makes it easier to see the principles involved because you don't have to keep track of where the sun is in each picture. It's always directly to the left side.
.