RULE #1 of Flat Earth Perspective:
Perspective can do anything that Tom wants it to do - without further explanation or clarification being needed.
Honestly, Tom is unable (or more likely, unwilling) to answer the two simplest possible questions:
* At sunset, where is the sun physically located?
* What path do the photons take to get from the Sun into our Eyes at sunset?
If he can't answer even those two simple things - and
not a single one of the other FE'ers will step up to the plate to answer them...then why would you assume that they'd be anything other than utterly clueless about the size of the sun at sunset?
As for the Wiki...it's a chaotic mess in this regard.
The summary of
https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Setting_of_the_Sun says that "The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to collapse in on itself."...Ah! So the sun should get smaller at the horizon! Urh...but it doesn't.
Then right below that is a Rowbotham quote that basically claims that it's refraction that causes this effect (I've debunked that one - and Tom says he doesn't believe it).
Then, in
https://wiki.tfes.org/Magnification_of_the_Sun_at_Sunset it again quotes Rowbotham - only this time he's claiming that the sun's image is magnified by water droplets in the air (in the manner that street lamps appear to get larger into the distance on a foggy day). I debunked this one too...plus see photos of sunset over death valley or the sahara desert - where the humidity is nearly zero and there ARE no water droplets.
Then, in
https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Accelerator it says that the suns rays are bent according to some funky equation containing the "Bishop Constant". Tom says this one isn't true...which is a wise decision because it's stupidly easy to debunk.
Then, in
https://wiki.tfes.org/Optics is quotes Rowbotham AGAIN, only now he's saying that "the angular limits of the human eye" are involved in the whole sorry mess. Evidently, Mr Rowbotham had never taken a photograph to see whether the human eye truly was the issue here.
Truly - reading the Wiki about this is a complete waste of time.
The FE'ers are totally all over the map about sunsets - and this should come as no surprise. Short of magic, no set of optical effects can explain the position *AND* the roundness *AND* the size of the setting sun. Any prediction based on any of their ideas breaks one of those three self-evident properties. And that's before we ask how the setting sun can illuminate the undersides of clouds and airplanes...even AFTER it's gone away (I want to say "gone below the horizon" - but FET can't make THAT happen either...so for chrissakes don't even try to ask what happens when the sun sets into a notch in the horizon caused by a deep valley!
Look - FET is busted.
So long as nobody has the guts to tell us the path of the photons...their entire tissue of nonsensical junk theories has collapsed around them. Tom has CLEARLY decided to "chicken out" of this one!