I just gave you the explanation.
You simply don't believe that explanation is true.
It isn't a matter of belief!
You make claims that are patently stupid and then when I can't take it any more you whine like a baby for calling you stupid!
There is no way for ANYTHING to EVER be hidden behind the horizon on a flat Earth. The horizon, if you could even make it out, is simply the line that delineates those things that are on the Earth from those things that are arent!!!
There would be no such thing as a ship disappearing over the horizon at all, never mind from the bottom up. The ship (or mountain or building or whatever) would either be visible or it would be so far into the distance as to be too tiny to discern.
You don't believe in perspective. I get that.
Perspective is not a matter of belief!
I know FOR A FACT what perspective is and PRECISELY what causes it and have given detailed descriptions of exactly how it works and why.
IT IS YOU WHO DON'T BELIEVE IT!
Anyway, I'm gong to graph out my own flat earth perspective matrix.
It will be a worthless waste of your time if you do anything other draw a matrix where the distance between grid lines shrink with the inverse of their distance. (i.e. half the distance between line with double the distance from the observer, etc)
Here's a hint. When drawn in two dimensions, perspective lines are arbitrary because you can say the Z axis (Distance) is whatever you want it to be.
In other words, you have to define terms BEFORE you draw your matrix or it's meaningless. You'll find it impossible to draw and for what you draw to match what you can see for yourself every single day of your life.
So why bring it up?
I dare you to read it long enough to understand it.
View attachment 26576
This is the graph/illustration that is the object of contention. If this fails then flat earth fails. If perspective is actually how we see the world then flat earth succeeds on this point but only if the sun and moon are small and close the earth. And yes, a change in size would be required. But there are those who say it does and of course those who say it does not.
Rather than make one graph with all the aspects in it, I'll make a number of simplified ones that show one aspect at a time.
--Dave
I simply cannot believe that you think that idiotic graph is worth even 10 seconds of your time. It's asinine on it's face! There is no such thing as an actual banishing point, David. Parallel lines do not ever actually intersect at a point far off into the distance. The so called vanishing point has to do with art theory, not science. If it exists in any sense at all its merely the point at which the apparent size of an object drops below the resolution of your eye (i.e. becomes microscopic). This point would be pushed back with any sort of telescope and ignoring atmospheric distortions and other effects, for the sake of argument, it could be pushed back indefinitely given sufficient magnification. It's no different than magnifying a bacterium under a microscope. The only difference is the actual size of the object in question and the distances involved.
Clete