then you would have it accompanying it

I do

The walt bislin simulation

You can look at the equations if you want

I also have another example of those calcs if you want

so whats the height and whats the distance?

https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/08/flat-earth-follies-high-altitude.html

i can see height in the img.

The Bislin shot was at about 10km height or 33000 feet

I did that in 2 seconds btw, we can do it more accurately

no. i mean what Jtolan observed

so we can find how much it should have been obstructed by the curvature you believe in

That's another topic

Isnt that what we are discussing? what you can see in the images you linked?

What I want us to agree to is that the horizon is curved at altitude

Globe Math is not supporting what you think those images show.

thats the point.

The calcs will match the horizon curve

Per walt bislin or many others

Every single prediction of the curvature have always failed.

Nope

It works great

Hence why no "curvature proof" has ever came with math alongside it.

Nope

Man you gotta be watching the wrong people then

I've seen hundreds of those

over the last years

So please show one.

Wow, well where to start

I hope Einstein is not a flatty

I like the super long range ones

let me get you one of those

But first, do we agree that the horizon *looks* curved at high altitudes?

like the world record photo?

Or will you look more into that at least

Yeah, the 443 km one

Just need a smidge more refraction than standard refraction then it matches

A tiny increase

let me get you another one 2 sek

No bring that world record aswell

I dont remember it being "almost matching"