You think I should stop? Is there no point in continuing to present observational evidence that puts the above-quoted explanations to the test?
I would say that you've done enough.
Your work has been outstanding but your recent post about horizon dip doesn't show anything different from your previous posts about it, you've shown the result very clearly multiple times. I'd say the onus is now on FE to do their own experiments - that is what they're all about, right? - if they dispute your findings. The photo at sunset was the best one because it proves that the line below your eye line level is the true horizon, cuts through Bishop's flim-flam about whether you're really seeing the "true horizon".
Like you, I don't expect the most dyed in the wool FEs to change their position (although I increasingly doubt their sincerity) but for people who come here genuinely questioning I'd hope your work and maybe some of my arguments will show them the right way.
This experiment is similar to some in Earth not a Globe. In particular #12. Comparing:
* Bobby's experiment: The heigh of the smoke stack is known and verifiable.
* EnaG#12: The height of the ship's mast is unverifiable as the ship is not specified.
* Bobby's experiment: The exact distance to the smoke stack is known and verifiable.
* EnaG#12: The distance to the ship was estimated. No claims confirming the speed of the ship are even made, just a "ordinary rate" is referenced, then the distance is stated as "at least", this does not follow. The bearing of the ship is unstated, it is unknown if the ship was traveling directly away from the observer the entire time.
* Bobby's experiment: Refraction is taken into account. This is to accurately model the globe earth.
* EnaG#12: Refraction is ignored. Accurately modeling the globe earth was not attempted.
* Bobby's experiment: Includes the predictions for flat earth. This is to accurately model the flat earth to test observations against that model.
* EnaG#12: Does not include predictions for flat earth observations. No attempts to confirm observations to an accurate model of the flat earth were attempted.
* Bobby's experiment: Other similar experiments have been performed and similarity documented on this forum.
* EnaG#12: Claims of other experiments are claimed but are utterly unsubstantiated. From EnaG#12: "Many other experiments of this kind have been made upon sea-going steamers, and always with results entirely incompatible with the theory that the earth is a globe."
Contrasting Bobby's experiment with #12, a sincere person must elevate Bobby's experiment over EnaG#12. Observers of this thread and other conversations will be able to ascertain if a participant is sincere or holding a dogmatic belief.
The goal cannot be to sway any particular dogmatic believer, this is impossible, dogmatic beliefs are not based on facts or a desire to ascertain the truth. Instead, serves as excellent information for people sincerely seeking the truth.