As we have several different time lapses showing that a sinking effect is occuring in the distance half the time, single pictures don't really cut it anymore.
Can you be more specific regarding "half the time"? Sure, we've all seen some miraging timelapses, like the skunk bay one, but I would hardly be so bold to say that they account for 50% of all sinking ship videos, if that's what you're claiming. And none of which ever account for the sinking ship completely 'sinking'.
We can equally find several "mountains prove flat earth" videos on YouTube.
Do share then.
The timelapses of the sinking ship effect cast doubt on all sinking photos. You need an experiment that controls for refraction.
If you mean skunk bay, no they don't cast doubt on any sinking photos. If you have other timelapses that show miraging I have just as many that don't. So this is neither here nor there.
Describe an experiment that controls for refraction. What do you mean by that exactly?
It can sometimes get close to what a Round Earth predicts, but not exact. A member of our forums, Bobby, was taking pictures of a sinking effect that changed every day he looked, providing further evidence that this effect is an illusion.
Time and time again, the margin of error is far more in favor of RE than FE. Even in the Turning Torso examination we found RE off by 10% and FE off by 80%, both not accounting for refraction. I'm ok with 10% margin of error.
And as for Bobby's experiments of late, the changes were not daily. There were some days when significant miraging occurred and
many days when it did not.
The round earth excuse is that it was earth curvature + illusion, but that is neither here nor there.
It's kind of disingenuous to point the refraction/miraging magic wand solely at RE when it's gainfully employed in explaining sunsets and sunrises in ALL circumstances for FE. There is no greater use of 'illusion' than that.