[Tommy]

Let's address some stuff regarding the vanishing point and horizons

Firstly, Light can be bent by gravity. However, Earth's gravity is RELATIVELY WEAK, compared to the sun and other bigger stars, and thus the bending of light is minimal.

Thus, at any point on the Earth, there will always be a vanishing point

Assuming that the Earth is flat, there will be NO VANISHING POINT. If you were to have perfect eyesight and are able to see infinitely far, you would be able to see many objects until your line of vision is blocked by an object. Thus, if you were to be floating out at sea, you would be able to see the nearest shore and building no matter how far you are away.

But, we can't

Assuming that the Earth is round, your line of sight would end at a certain point. This is true, and is the result of objects becoming smaller as they are further away from you. This effect is called micropsia. This proves the existence of a vanishing point and thus there can only be 1 explanation -- the earth is round

[juner]

The atmoplane in FET isn't perfectly transparent (nor is the atmosphere in RET).

Is this really that hard for you?

[nickrulercreator]

The atmoplane in FET isn't perfectly transparent (nor is the atmosphere in RET).

Is this really that hard for you?

While this is true, is it that opaque to be able to bend the light from the sun so much that the sun looks like it is setting, without changing speed in the sky, and without changing angular diameter?

[xenotolerance]

No, it isn't.

Things look more blue and less clear at great distances. Atmospheric perspective has no effect on apparent position, size, or other elements of linear perspective.

Incidentally, one piece of evidence that the Earth is round is that the horizon looks like a clear line. At its closest, it's only ~3 miles away, and humans are capable of seeing ... stuff, e.g. mountains, at far greater distances. If the Earth were flat, the horizon would never appear as a clear line, and the land/sea would gradually get blue and hazy in transition to the sky. Or as OP suggests, if you had a telescope / inhumanly good eyes, you would be able to refocus lenses and resolve images at immense distances, potentially well enough to see the entire Earth at once, from a height of just a few miles. You'd be able to see the entire outline of the spotlight sun from airplanes. You'd be able to put a Euro in some binoculars in Paris and look at the London skyline.

you can't though, because the Earth is not flat

[nickrulercreator]

No, it isn't.

Things look more blue and less clear at great distances. Atmospheric perspective has no effect on apparent position, size, or other elements of linear perspective.

Incidentally, one piece of evidence that the Earth is round is that the horizon looks like a clear line. At its closest, it's only ~3 miles away, and humans are capable of seeing ... stuff, e.g. mountains, at far greater distances. If the Earth were flat, the horizon would never appear as a clear line, and the land/sea would gradually get blue and hazy in transition to the sky. Or as OP suggests, if you had a telescope / inhumanly good eyes, you would be able to refocus lenses and resolve images at immense distances, potentially well enough to see the entire Earth at once, from a height of just a few miles. You'd be able to see the entire outline of the spotlight sun from airplanes. You'd be able to put a Euro in some binoculars in Paris and look at the London skyline.

you can't though, because the Earth is not flat

Thank you, this is exactly the point I was (trying to kind of) make (I'm a RE btw).

What can we assume Junker will post?