Thank you for your reply, Stack. You see that link to an actual discussion, people conversing and trying to figure things out is much more of what I was looking for. That discussion is interesting and raises another couple of good questions, as well as calling into question of how Perspective is the cause of sun sets and sun rises. I believe Law of Perspective is being misrepresented in the FET, as while with something a plane flying over head, with perspective you'll always have to look up at something above you, just like you'll always have to look down at something on the ground. The FET Sun is above you, therefore with the Law of Perspective(from how I understand it, as I'm no expert), cannot cross the perspective line, it'll always appear above you. But that's not what I observe when I watch a sun set or sun rise. Then there is also the problem with if the sun is small and only 3000 miles away, when it appears over the horizon at sun rise it'll appear smaller than when its directly over head at Noon.
Agreed, I haven't seen a distinct and cogent rebuttal from FET as to how the supposed 'Law of Perspective' explains the sun below-lit clouds at sunrise or sunset. As it stands, I'm guessing, from an FET standpoint, the phenomena is unknown. Which you will find for many observable celestial and other occurrences. From the other thread, I think this is a great example; Mt. Ranier (14k ft) is significantly lower than the FET height of the sun - If the sun maintains it's altitude of 3000 miles throughout its path, how does it cast a shadow upward on to the clouds? Perhaps someone with a better understanding of FET will weigh in.
Having watched more than a handful of YouTube Videos on the subject, I know not a credible source, but I've seen this come up in most, if not all of them. They mention Airy's Failure as proof the world is stationary. But this is not the case, Airy's Failure proved that Ether didn't exist. Simply put we believed that because Light is a wave like sound, that it needed a medium to travel through, thus Ether was proposed, Airy's Failure proved that Ether did not exist which led to the Theory of Relativity. Airy's Failure had nothing to do with whether the Earth was moving or not. Even so you claim that Airy's Failure as a means to reject the Theory of Relativity.
This is a whole other topic of discussion that leads down a path of Michelson-Morley, Coriolis, Universal Acceleration, I could go on. Best to break this out into a separate thread.
I've witnessed this phenomena multiple times as I live in the Pacific Coast Mountains and travel a lot. I've also seen this in the Cascades Rocky's and Sierra Nevada along with coastal mountains looking west at the sunset.
Driving west in the evening on a cloudy day, I'm above the clouds and see blue sky and sun shine. A few minute later the sun drops below the clouds and my headlights come on. A few more minutes pass and I drop 2,000 feet in elevation which puts me below the clouds, my headlights go off and I can see the sun once again at the horizon.
As I watch the sun drop below the visible horizon(vanishing point) my head lights come on again and I see the bottom of the clouds illuminated by the sun light. I also look up and see the bottom of jets illuminated along with there contrails casting shadows upward.
Some more honest questions.
#1 Flat Earth has continents to the far west and far east edges. How can we leave the west coast of the west continent flying or sailing west, and not hit the ice wall as it's very close, but some how spin a circle and end up on the east coast of the far east continent.
#2 All RE navigational equipment and technology is fooled by FE forces into believing we are travailing in a straight when, (on FE), we are allegedly spinning a circle, what are these forces and how do they work?