Conspiracy about the flat earth conspiracy - Thread bans in OP

Sorry, but I asked you the question first before you attempted to divert away from it. So either man up and admit that you can’t explain it because it’s nonsense, or answer it.

Depends on how far the object it. It scales with distance. At 5km the curvature will be almost 2 meters. At 10km it will be 7.85 meters. 20km around 31 meters (it's not linear as it's a curve). So on a clear day ships around 7km or more out should start to noticeably appear lower and lower in the water. This is due to the curvature of the Earth.

There's no "old chestnut". People who maintain the earth is flat can't coherently explain the sunset, gravity (they use "magnetism"), day/night cycles across 50% of the world's surface, any of that stuff. They don't have any model or anything. Just a picture of the azimuthal equidistant projection of the globe, which they've mistaken for a flat map.

Ships disappearing over the horizon debunks everything you've said. It proves you are wrong.

You have not debunked any maths. You have made some references that simply proved you lack basic maths. The difference between linear and area for example. Please try again.

If you can't grasp a horizon bother wasting time explaining gravity.

You have not been able to point to an object that you can see behind the curve that you should not. You gave the example of a lighthouse, and I proved how you were wrong. The curvature states you should be able to see the lighthouse from Dalkey or Dun Laoghaire. The curvature says you can't see beaches in wales, and low and behold you can't - flat earthers like yourself, claim that you can.

(again, I don't actually believe you are this naive, and are just having a bit of fun)

All staged apparently. They're all in on it.

It's not complicated. Those in the distance are lower due to curvature.

Here's zoomed in footage of boats/ships on and over the horizon

You have a smart phone? binoculars? a pair of eyes? You can see this yourself on a clear day by the sea.

Don't you regularly post the fr Ted meme "this cow is near but the ones out there are far away"?

Bizarre that you think the turbines in the distance, in the background would appear the same level as the ones in the foreground if on a plane...

Bizzare thing to claim.

You're claiming that due to perspective things gets shorter faster than they get less wide.

That make zero sense.

If the earth were flat as you believe then there would be no difference in the level of those wind turbines.

You don't seem to understand the meme you're referring to.

This is the perfect example of why conspiracy theorists never ever want to actually detail or explain their theory outside of picking holes in the "official story". The second they try, the holes becoming very obvious and impossible to deal with.

Marcus has claimed that things in the background do not appear level to the things in the foreground.

This is a solid statement that we can assess.

According to the flat earth theory, this is what we should see:

The windmills appearing to get smaller the further away they are, with the bases on the same flat level.

However, Markus's theory is that things get shorter faster than they get smaller proportional to the distance. Which would look like this:

How this happens is not going to be explained, cause flat earthers don't really analyse their own theory in this much detail (ie. the barest amount of detail.) This issue can only be ignored and avoided. It's better if wasn't brought up at all, but that's because Markus messed up and made a solid statement rather than just pick holes.

Not really. If you are below the centre it will fall, if you are above it it will rise. It will only stay inline if you are inline with it. The top could even rise if you are a one it. It’s just perspective, the vanishing point is it line with your eye level.

But again, this doesn't make any sense.

It's not that the bases are obscured, the water is obscuring the majority of the structure. The waves are not actually coming up to the blades of the windmill.

You're also already contradicting your previous statement, indicating that your worldview is completely inconsistent, or you are simply making up stuff as it comes to you.

You've also still not actually explained the picture in terms of your apparent beliefs. Nor have you actually clarified what your beliefs actually are.

Again, perfect demonstration of how conspiracy theories work.

there's so much heat distortion in that picture that you can't draw any conclusions from it. There are ample examples online of infrared photographs (taken from a height to mitigate against immediate surrounding obstructions) that show landmarks over 200km away, which clearly defy every single one of the many, many curve calculators online.

Why is there no single accepted curve calculator? the wildly sporadic differences in all of them is bizarre, not sure why you think this isn't unusual.