So, on the way home, the moon was relatively low on the horizon and it looked huge ... probably 4 - 5 times its normal size.

This has been referred to as the "Moon Illusion".

Science evidently can't explain it and have chalked it up as being a psychological phenomenon.

I call bull on that.  There's no way this is psychological.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_illusion

So what do flat earth proponents say about this?  IMO is the moon is a relatively constant distance from the earth, there's no way it could ever look that big in the sky.  Atmospheric refraction does not suffice as an explanation.  Plus you could clearly see the moon's topography ... which is ridiculous if it's actually almost 250,000 miles away.

I was on the way home from first Saturday Mass with my nephew and we saw exactly what you describe, to the tee. I would say that there could be some reflective work at hand since the color orangish and returned to beije once it returned to its normal size, but Im no expert.

Probably because atmospheric refraction is typically a very small effect. 

Ladislaus, I think what is meant by psychological phenomenon is more optical illusion than anything. There are plenty of examples out there of optical illusions that can make things appear to be different sizes when they aren't (one example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbinghaus_illusion).

Simple experiment you can do to check this for yourself (I pulled this off some random website): "To see for yourself, take a sheet of paper and roll it up into a narrow tube. Point it at the rising Moon and adjust the tube's size until it's a little larger than the Moon's diameter. Tape the tube so its size stays the same and look at the Moon again a few hours later when it's higher in the sky. You'll see it fills the same space."

Note: I haven't tried this, but it seems to make sense. Let me know what you see if you get a chance to.

Here's an interesting theory:  

"Secondly, to address issues regarding the size of the sun at its setting, it is necessary to read Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe:

CAUSE OF SUN APPEARING LARGER WHEN RISING AND SETTING THAN AT NOONDAY

IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or rather gives a greater "glare," at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light or "glare" upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour. The following diagram, fig. 66, will show also that, as the sun recedes from the meridian, over a plane surface, the light, as it strikes the atmosphere, must give a larger disc.


FIG. 66.

Let A, B, represent the upper stratum of the atmosphere; C, D, the surface of the earth; and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, the sun, in his morning, forenoon, noon, afternoon, and evening positions. It is evident that when he is in the position 1, the disc of light projected upon the atmosphere at 6, is considerably larger than the disc projected from the forenoon position, 2, upon the atmosphere at 7; and the disc at 7 is larger than that formed at 8, when the sun, at 3, is on the meridian; when at 4, the disc at 9 is again larger; and when at 5, or in the evening, the disc at 10 is again as large as at 6, or the morning position. It is evident that the above results are what must of necessity occur if the sun's path, the line of atmosphere, and the earth's surface, are parallel and horizontal lines. That such results do constantly occur is a matter of everyday observation; and we may logically deduce front it a striking argument against the rotundity of the earth, and in favour of the contrary conclusion, that it is horizontal. The atmosphere surrounding a globe would not permit of anything like the same degree of enlargement of the sun when rising and setting, as we daily see in nature.

« Last Edit: August 13, 2007, 01:29:26 PM by Tom Bishop »"

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=16229.0

I was on the way home from first Saturday Mass with my nephew and we saw exactly what you describe, to the tee. I would say that there could be some reflective work at hand since the color orangish and returned to beije once it returned to its normal size, but Im no expert.

That's what I thought too, but then my wife told me she had read that it was only an "illusion".  So I looked up "moon illusion" and found this.  If you look at the scientific articles, they have ruled out atmospheric distortion, saying that dust in the atmosphere would actually make the moon look a bit smaller.  And they also don't believe that refraction is the cause.

So they've chalked it up to some psychological optical illusion.  But no one can quite explain how that works either ... they're just guessing.  What's funny is that, with as advanced as they claim science has gotten, they simply can't convincingly explain this phenomenon.

Ladislaus, I think what is meant by psychological phenomenon is more optical illusion than anything. There are plenty of examples out there of optical illusions that can make things appear to be different sizes when they aren't (one example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebbinghaus_illusion).

Right, they're saying that ... but they still can't explain the precise mechanism for this optical illusion.  If it were that simple, the question wouldn't remain "debated".  And I think that is why they refer to it as psychological ... because no one can explain precisely how the optical illusion works.  Most optical illusions can be explained.

I wonder if it is just closer though.  

Yeah. Except they SAY that if you hold some object up to the moon when it's big like that and then do the same thing when it looks smaller, it'll still be covered up by the same length of the object.  I'll try that at some point.

Here's an interesting theory:  

"Secondly, to address issues regarding the size of the sun at its setting, it is necessary to read Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe:

CAUSE OF SUN APPEARING LARGER WHEN RISING AND SETTING THAN AT NOONDAY

IT is well known that when a light of any kind shines through a dense medium it appears larger, or rather gives a greater "glare," at a given distance than when it is seen through a lighter medium. This is more remarkable when the medium holds aqueous particles or vapour in solution, as in a damp or foggy atmosphere. Anyone may be satisfied of this by standing within a few yards of an ordinary street lamp, and noticing the size of the flame; on going away to many times the distance, the light or "glare" upon the atmosphere will appear considerably larger. This phenomenon may be noticed, to a greater or less degree, at all times; but when the air is moist and vapoury it is more intense. It is evident that at sunrise, and at sunset, the sun's light must shine through a greater length of atmospheric air than at mid-day; besides which, the air near the earth is both more dense, and holds more watery particles in solution, than the higher strata through which the sun shines at noonday; and hence the light must be dilated or magnified, as well as modified in colour. The following diagram, fig. 66, will show also that, as the sun recedes from the meridian, over a plane surface, the light, as it strikes the atmosphere, must give a larger disc.


FIG. 66.

Let A, B, represent the upper stratum of the atmosphere; C, D, the surface of the earth; and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, the sun, in his morning, forenoon, noon, afternoon, and evening positions. It is evident that when he is in the position 1, the disc of light projected upon the atmosphere at 6, is considerably larger than the disc projected from the forenoon position, 2, upon the atmosphere at 7; and the disc at 7 is larger than that formed at 8, when the sun, at 3, is on the meridian; when at 4, the disc at 9 is again larger; and when at 5, or in the evening, the disc at 10 is again as large as at 6, or the morning position. It is evident that the above results are what must of necessity occur if the sun's path, the line of atmosphere, and the earth's surface, are parallel and horizontal lines. That such results do constantly occur is a matter of everyday observation; and we may logically deduce front it a striking argument against the rotundity of the earth, and in favour of the contrary conclusion, that it is horizontal. The atmosphere surrounding a globe would not permit of anything like the same degree of enlargement of the sun when rising and setting, as we daily see in nature.

« Last Edit: August 13, 2007, 01:29:26 PM by Tom Bishop »"

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=16229.0

This is the correct explanation.
You are viewing it, at rise & set, thru the water vapor of the atmosphere, along the horizon,  therefore the thickest continuous layer of vapor.
Like when you stick your finger in a glass of water and it makes your finger look bigger than it really is.
When the moon is at zenith you are only looking thru a thin layer of atmosphere.
Also, in FE model the moon is at its closest distance at zenith,  and is at its furthest distance at rise and set.