@BiggerPicture best proof. Go look over water and try to measure a curve

Direct measurements

is that possible?

to measure

Globe suppose to measure 8 inches per mile squared

Curve

ok

So 3 miles is 6 ft

10 miles is 66 ft

3 miles 2 feet?

wait my bad

2 miles 2.6 ft

3 miles 6 ft

i gotcha

8 inches x miles

24 inches

3 miles

or am i stupid

ok

and how do i measure at some water?

Go 8 inches × miles diatance ÷ 12 × miles distance =

So 8 inches × 2 miles = 16 inches ÷ by 12 inches (1 foot) equals 1.3 × 2 miles = 2.6 feet.

So 30 miles would go like this

8 inches × 30 miles = 240 inches ÷ 12 inches (1 foot) = 20 feet × 30 miles = 600 feet curve

I think lol

Yes that's right

So if you believe in the globe and never measured this, that makes you part of a belief system

R = 6,371,000
h0 = 2,800
d0 = 443,000
R^2 = 4.0589641×10¹³
d^2+R^2 => d1 = root(h0^2 +2Rh0
d1 = root(2,800 + 2 x6,371,000 x 2,800)
d1 = root (7840000 + 35677600000)
d1 = root(35685440000)
d1 = 188905.9025 to 4 d.p.
(R+h1)^2 = d2^2 + R^2 => h1 = root(d2^2+R^2) - R
d2 = d0-d1
d2 = 443,000 - 188905.9025
d2 = 254094.0974
h1 = root (254094.0974^2 + 6,371,000^2) - 6,371,000
h1 = root(64563810383.4510 + 4.0589641×10¹³) - 6,361,000
h1 = root(4.065420481038345108741×10¹³) -6,371,000
h1 = 6376064.9942 - 6,371,000
h1 = 5064.994

5064>3800 Proof Earth's flat

Water curves uphill on a ball 😆

So this is my equation

7.98 x y2/12

😁

That's their standard refraction model for 123 miles

Well the blue is the earth. The red is the path light takes in their standard refraction model
So anything on the earth at the blue will be elevated to the red
by refraction
So that is the standard 7/6 R

If your at 1000 miles altitude I guess you can see the other side lol

Here's the thing. Actual experiments show refraction varies from 20X to - 20X
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/379214321907007488/533401661776068669/unknown.png
On the other hand, our empirical results show that the
refraction coefficient k may reach magnitudes as large as +12 to +16 over grassland at 1.8 m. This clearly
exceeds previously published ‘extreme values’ (e.g., maximum values of k = +6 at 1.5 m height over grassland,
cf. Hübner [1977]). We acknowledge that surface types like ice or water may even produce larger refraction
effects, as described in section 2.

As you can see from what I just posted , they measured what would be radius that would be 16 times larger than the earth radius
They think k they model refraction ,.In fact they model the deviation from from the globe radius.
They don't measure the refractive index of the air. the impute it from the deviation of an expected value
of course. Their model follows earths curve perfectly
think about how nonsensical that is. exactly equals the curve of the earth...idiocy...