"Seriously, if the Sun is a flying pot light it should look like a flying pot light from a distance. Instead, it looks like a giant ball of fire that maintains its circular shape as it apparently sets while our line of sight to it is cut off by the rotation of the globe."
Not a full FE here, yet. They've got some good arguments. What I notice though is that both sphere and flat models have some anomalies that their respective paradigms cannot explain.
To your Sun always looking like a disk point; the Flat Earther would most likely respond by saying the Sun is moving over the Dome (Firmament) above the Earth. This would make the disk appear more round throughout it's trajectory across the sky.
Again: model that. Now you have to explain the trajectory of light from the difference in where that light source is now pointing in order to create that shape. Presenting the firmament as an argument to combat my argument doesn't actually defeat my argument, it makes the other side worse. Because now you have to explain why the sun sets at all.
Clearly the sun moves below the water line from our perspective when we are looking at the sunset over the ocean. It does not move laterally when it's setting. A disc even with the fermament would require the sun to move laterally as it sets from a ground perspective. Furthermore the sun in a disc setting firmament or not will never look like it's going below the water from your perspective.
If it's on the inside of a dome and it maintains its disc shape because of its orientation relative on the dome that doesn't fix anything. Now you have to explain why the sun isn't an ellipse at noon.
Now you have to explain why the night exists.
Again you have to 3D model it and actually like look at the results of those models. Both from an overs perspective and from a ground perspective.
You have to explain why something that is flying looks like it's going underneath something that you know that you are above. When you know that thing is above you still.
You have to remember that you were talking about a flat plane when you're talking about this stuff. In a flat plain scenario like that if it looks like the sun collided with the ocean that would literally mean that the sun collided with the ocean.
There are no tricks of perspective on a flat plane.
Furthermore the sun in a disc setting firmament or not will never look like it's going below the water from your perspective.
As the sun descends it will create a tangent into the horizon. The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to intersect the horizon from the bottom up. Next the light of the receding sun is dimmed to blackness by a non-transparent atmosphere.
“ At these times it appears close to the horizon where the density of the air differs greatly. The air near the ground is denser than the layer of air just above it, and the layer of air above that is less dense still, and so on upwards until the Earth's atmosphere peters out at some 400 km. Now consider what happens when the Sun is setting. When the Sun is at the horizon, light from the top of the disc is going through the air at a different angle than that from the lower part. So the rays are bent by different amounts before they reach the observer's eye. The result is that the bottom part of the Sun's disc appears to be lifted up. In consequence the Sun's disc appears slightly compressed. ”
—Samuel Birley Rowbotham
Light posts getting shorter and disappearing into the distance. A flock of birds flying away from you. Almost any object that starts close and moves farther away will "appear" to disappear into the distance. This is Perspective in action.
Not a full FE here, yet. They've got some good arguments. What I notice though is that both sphere and flat models have some anomalies that their respective paradigms cannot explain.
To your Sun always looking like a disk point; the Flat Earther would most likely respond by saying the Sun is moving over the Dome (Firmament) above the Earth. This would make the disk appear more round throughout it's trajectory across the sky.
Again: model that. Now you have to explain the trajectory of light from the difference in where that light source is now pointing in order to create that shape. Presenting the firmament as an argument to combat my argument doesn't actually defeat my argument, it makes the other side worse. Because now you have to explain why the sun sets at all.
Clearly the sun moves below the water line from our perspective when we are looking at the sunset over the ocean. It does not move laterally when it's setting. A disc even with the fermament would require the sun to move laterally as it sets from a ground perspective. Furthermore the sun in a disc setting firmament or not will never look like it's going below the water from your perspective.
If it's on the inside of a dome and it maintains its disc shape because of its orientation relative on the dome that doesn't fix anything. Now you have to explain why the sun isn't an ellipse at noon.
Now you have to explain why the night exists.
Again you have to 3D model it and actually like look at the results of those models. Both from an overs perspective and from a ground perspective.
You have to explain why something that is flying looks like it's going underneath something that you know that you are above. When you know that thing is above you still.
You have to remember that you were talking about a flat plane when you're talking about this stuff. In a flat plain scenario like that if it looks like the sun collided with the ocean that would literally mean that the sun collided with the ocean.
There are no tricks of perspective on a flat plane.
As the sun descends it will create a tangent into the horizon. The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to intersect the horizon from the bottom up. Next the light of the receding sun is dimmed to blackness by a non-transparent atmosphere.
Draw a picture.
This is false. Perspective makes all sorts of objects "disappear" into the distance.
Give an example.
Light posts getting shorter and disappearing into the distance. A flock of birds flying away from you. Almost any object that starts close and moves farther away will "appear" to disappear into the distance. This is Perspective in action.