[WTF_Seriously]

How do you know what they would say?

Well, based on the totally unscientific and meaningless sample size of the posts since yours it appears that I'm on the right track.

do you have any authentic pics of the same occurrence?

Evidently reading the thread you're posting in is not your thing.

[SimonC]

How do you know what they would say?

Well, based on the totally unscientific and meaningless sample size of the posts since yours it appears that I'm on the right track.

That explanation also sounds unscientific.

do you have any authentic pics of the same occurrence?

Evidently reading the thread you're posting in is not your thing.

Call the coastguard, quick:-)
It might be credible if this video had been an 'official' and authentic recording. It could quite easily be CGI. The word 'debunked' usually means someone has deliberately set out to prove something wrong rather than just to stumble upon something.

[markjo]

It might be credible if this video had been an 'official' and authentic recording.

What "official" agency do you suppose would be recording such videos and why would you believe them?  We all know how "official" agencies lie all the time.

It could quite easily be CGI.

It can also be independently recreated by anyone with the appropriate consumer grade equipment.

The word 'debunked' usually means someone has deliberately set out to prove something wrong rather than just to stumble upon something.

What makes you think that whoever recorded that video didn't deliberately set out to prove that the FE claims about ships and the horizon are wrong?

[Tumeni]

It could quite easily be CGI.

"could"

You have no evidence that it is, right? None at all.

[SimonC]

If the earth is a globe then any image of a ship beyond the horizon would not be sitting at right angles to the horizon. It would be at right angles to the relevant curvature. The ships in the image are both upright which clearly shows the pic is a fake.
If an infinite number of ships on the sea beyond the horizon (one after the other) could be viewed to an infinite distance they would not be sitting like little ducks in a row.

[SimonC]

It might be credible if this video had been an 'official' and authentic recording.

What "official" agency do you suppose would be recording such videos and why would you believe them?  We all know how "official" agencies lie all the time.

It could quite easily be CGI.

It can also be independently recreated by anyone with the appropriate consumer grade equipment.

The word 'debunked' usually means someone has deliberately set out to prove something wrong rather than just to stumble upon something.

What makes you think that whoever recorded that video didn't deliberately set out to prove that the FE claims about ships and the horizon are wrong?

This sort of thing would be ideal for David Attenboroughs 'Planet' series - we are forever being shown whats on the planet but not what the planet actually is. Film crews spend months and months waiting to catch a glimpse of a snow leopard. If they sat for 20 minutes at a busy port they could surely replicate these images. But they don't.

[Tumeni]

If the earth is a globe then any image of a ship beyond the horizon would not be sitting at right angles to the horizon. It would be at right angles to the relevant curvature. The ships in the image are both upright which clearly shows the pic is a fake.

...but the curvature is directly away from the observer, along his line of sight. Not left to right across his field of view. Besides which, using textbook sizes and angles, a ship would have to be 69 miles to either the left or right to exhibit only one degree of deviation from the vertical.

In the example shown, if the farther ship was 69 miles from the observer, it would only exhibit an inclination of only one degree away from the observer, which would be totally invisible to him

[DuncanDoenitz]

If the earth is a globe then any image of a ship beyond the horizon would not be sitting at right angles to the horizon. It would be at right angles to the relevant curvature. The ships in the image are both upright which clearly shows the pic is a fake.
If an infinite number of ships on the sea beyond the horizon (one after the other) could be viewed to an infinite distance they would not be sitting like little ducks in a row.

As Tumeni said (while I was writing); Correct.  If the ship were 60 nautical miles from the observer it would appear to be tilting away by 1 degree.  As the ship appears to be less than 60 nautical miles, the angle of tilt will be less that 1 degree.  Please demonstrate that the ship shown is not leaning away by less that 1 degree. 

[Tumeni]

If they sat for 20 minutes at a busy port they could surely replicate these images. But they don't.

... because they don't need to, when the general public can see them for themselves.

Even when someone DOES produce a photo or a video of this, all you do is deride it on the basis that it COULD be CGI or Photoshop. Never any actual proof that it is, just "could be" ....

[AATW]

Film crews spend months and months waiting to catch a glimpse of a snow leopard. If they sat for 20 minutes at a busy port they could surely replicate these images. But they don't.

Why would they? Discovering more about the snow leopard is something interesting and useful to science. Demonstrating that the earth is a sphere, when we have an ISS orbiting it and have technologies like GPS and Satellite TV which relies on that fact, is not. But if you are sincere about wanting to understand more about reality then you could do some of these tests yourself. The equipment required to do so is not prohibitively expensive these days. If you’re going to call any pictures of video which don’t confirm your beliefs CGI then why not do your own tests? Part of your confusion seems to be not understanding how big the earth is. The fact you think that distant ships or buildings should be angled steeply away from the observer demonstrates you’re not understanding the scale of things. As other have posted, the ships would be angled away from the viewer at a fraction of a degree. Not something which would be noticeable to the naked eye.

[markjo]

This sort of thing would be ideal for David Attenboroughs 'Planet' series...

Right, because David Attenborough would never do anything to deceive us.

It’s about time we recognised that nature documentary makers regularly deceive us – and we’re partly to blame

Over and over we hear revelations that scenes are staged and mischaracterised, yet David Attenborough seems to remain beyond reproach in the eyes of the British public

Why take anyone else's word for it when you can  just go to the beach and look for yourself?

[Tumeni]

This sort of thing would be ideal for David Attenboroughs 'Planet' series - we are forever being shown whats on the planet but not what the planet actually is. Film crews spend months and months waiting to catch a glimpse of a snow leopard. If they sat for 20 minutes at a busy port they could surely replicate these images. But they don't.

Do you live in a coastal region? Can you reach the coast easily?

[SimonC]

So at what point i.e. distance from the shore, would a ship become impossible to see (assuming it has an unlimited height) due to the curvature of the earth? I presume the 90 degree mark i.e. 6,000 miles away?
And if such a ship had a mast lets say of 4,000 feet tall - assuming curvature of 8 inches per mile then using a telescope capable of seeing such a distance what would that ship look like in the water? According to the figures mentioned above it would appear to be lying on its side i.e. at 90 degrees but we know that isnt how it would be. I rather fancy it would still be sailing at right angles to the water surface.

[SteelyBob]

So at what point i.e. distance from the shore, would a ship become impossible to see (assuming it has an unlimited height) due to the curvature of the earth? I presume the 90 degree mark i.e. 6,000 miles away?
And if such a ship had a mast lets say of 4,000 feet tall - assuming curvature of 8 inches per mile then using a telescope capable of seeing such a distance what would that ship look like in the water? According to the figures mentioned above it would appear to be lying on its side i.e. at 90 degrees but we know that isnt how it would be. I rather fancy it would still be sailing at right angles to the water surface.

Using this calculator: https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature

...and an observer height of 1.7m (ie a man standing at sea level) then a 4000ft object would be completely obscured at 80 statute miles, so still pretty much 1 degree of tilt territory. Note that this ignores refraction, which will, depending on the conditions, increase the distance that distant objects can be seen, as well as meteorological visibility, which generally prevents anything further than 10-20 miles or so being seen clearly. And that tilt is with respect to the observer, not the local see. Anywhere on earth the surface appears to be level. It is earth's massive size, compared to us as humans, that causes the confusion. There are many ways to demonstrate or test for the shape - gyroscopes, stellar observations, distant objects disappearing below the horizon - but as you are demonstrating, if you aren't willing to be open-minded, it's a somewhat futile task to change peoples' opinions.

[Tumeni]

So at what point i.e. distance from the shore, would a ship become impossible to see (assuming it has an unlimited height) due to the curvature of the earth? I presume the 90 degree mark i.e. 6,000 miles away?

One can only compute this if the height of the ship is known. Not with an unspecified "unlimited" height

[SteelyBob]

So at what point i.e. distance from the shore, would a ship become impossible to see (assuming it has an unlimited height) due to the curvature of the earth? I presume the 90 degree mark i.e. 6,000 miles away?

One can only compute this if the height of the ship is known. Not with an unspecified "unlimited" height

I guess if the height was unlimited (ie infinite) then you would be able to see some part of it on all locations on the globe apart from the point directly opposite the observer - ie if the observer was at the North Pole and the infinite tall thing was at the South Pole, then you wouldn't be able to see it. Deviate from that position, however, and the infinite vertical protrusion would also have some infinite horizontal component part as well, meaning you'd see it sticking out.

A somewhat odd thought experiment.

[Tumeni]

Let us take the Earth as a perfect sphere.

Place a human on the surface, and let's say he is 1.7m tall. He will be able to see to the horizon, and whatever is nearer than the horizon, but nothing of the Earth's surface beyond it. If we draw a plumbline, a vertical at his location, his sightline to and beyond the horizon will be the green angle H. (EDIT - No, it will not BE the green angle - the sightline and vertical will FORM the angle H)

If there's a ship out there of infinite height, and we also draw a plumb vertical at its location, the angle between that plumb and the vertical we formed at the human's location will be the red angle S

These two lines can only meet (i.e. the human's sightline will meet the ship's infinite height) if angle S is greater than H. If they are equal, the sightline will be parallel to the ship, and can never meet it. If S is less than H, the sightline will diverge away from the ship. The lines can only meet if they converge. If S is greater than H. I could work out the maths to the Nth degree to determine exactly how far, but really ...

[SteelyBob]

Let us take the Earth as a perfect sphere.

Place a human on the surface, and let's say he is 1.7m tall. He will be able to see to the horizon, and whatever is nearer than the horizon, but nothing of the Earth's surface beyond it. If we draw a plumbline, a vertical at his location, his sightline to and beyond the horizon will be the green angle H.

If there's a ship out there of infinite height, and we also draw a plumb vertical at its location, the angle between that plumb and the vertical we formed at the human's location will be the red angle S

These two lines can only meet (i.e. the human's sightline will meet the ship's infinite height) if angle S is greater than H. If they are equal, the sightline will be parallel to the ship, and can never meet it. If S is less than H, the sightline will diverge away from the ship. The lines can only meet if they converge. If S is greater than H. I could work out the maths to the Nth degree to determine exactly how far, but really ...

My bad - you are absolutely correct. Nicely explained.

[SimonC]

Some interesting diagrams and explanations. Thank you.
It seems that the further away from the shoreline the ship travels that the more it tilts away from the observer standing on the shore. To the extent that if it could be zoomed in enough and with an unlimited height it would eventually lean so far away from the observer that it was not visible. Would that not be the case?
 
I have a further question and would be grateful for comments.
In the attached diagram (I hope it attaches) it shows the earth (blue circle) and astronaut (at position 'A', and the astronauts line of vision to the earth (the red arrow). The stick person is what I would presume the astronaut would see if they zoomed in on a person at or near to the equator. They would appear to be sticking out at right angles to the earth. Can anyone explain why this would not be the case? I understand the global earth has no top or bottom or sides. But the astronaut surely wouldn't see the person standing vertically - could they? Would they?

[Tumeni]

Some interesting diagrams and explanations. Thank you. It seems that the further away from the shoreline the ship travels that the more it tilts away from the observer standing on the shore. To the extent that if it could be zoomed in enough and with an unlimited height it would eventually lean so far away from the observer that it was not visible. Would that not be the case?

Isn't that basically what I said and diagrammed, just phrased slightly differently?

If S is less than H, the non-parallel lines must meet at some point, no matter how far away. In theory, the observer has a direct sight line to, and can see the ship of infinite height.

If S is equal to H, the lines are parallel and cannot meet
If S is greater than H, the lines are divergent away from each other and cannot meet

In both of the latter cases, the observer cannot see the ship of infinite height