The radius of the Earth is fundamental in the spinning water ball cosmology. If Earth is smaller or bigger than what it's said to be, the whole solar system would be thrown off kilter. The spin, rotation, and interplanetary and solar distances we are taught are finely tuned to give us day, night, seasons, and distance from the sun, moon, and other objects in space. Any significant change in Earth's radius, and thus mass, would not be survivable for us and certainly not for the sacrosanct heliocentric (sun-centered) model.
 
The following provides proof that the Earth is not just a little, but must be way way bigger than we've been told. It's also not moving as Parts 3,4,5, and 11 prove. Its size and shape are also not the images used to show the Earth from space. The purported shape of the Earth cast as a shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse is also not true.
 
 
MEASURING THE EARTH'S CURVE DOWN
According to standard cosmology, the Earth has a radius of 3, 959 miles and a circumference of 25,000 miles.

⌕ Click to enlarge

That means the surface of the Earth sphere should drop 8 inches per mile squared, as charted here. etc. 

⌕ Click to enlarge

Go to these sites produced by 3959 radius Earth believers for readymade calculations.
 
Earth Curve Calculator
Earth Curvature Calculator
 
 
NOBODY HAS DIRECTLY MEASURED THE CURVE
Surprisingly, there has never been a direct measurement of the Earth's curve demonstrating the above drops of Earth's surface due to curvature. That should be easy enough, particularly in our modern day of science and technology.
 
For example, over 10 miles, the Earth's surface should drop 66.6 feet, the height of about this six-story building.

⌕ Click to enlarge

But no direct measurement of the Earth's radius, diameter, or drop over distance has ever been done. Without that, there is no reason to believe the 66.6 feet of curvature at 10 miles is actually true.
 
The fact that there is no measured proof, in itself, even omitting all that follows, closes the case on the Earth having a radius of 3959 miles.
 
 
AN ANCIENT GREEK DID NOT PROVE THE EARTH'S RADIUS
Eratosthenes (276 BC) is said to be the first man to measure the size of the Earth accurately. He measured the angle made by a shadow cast from a vertical stick in two different cities 500 miles apart on the same day and time. (How that feat was accomplished 2300 years ago is not satisfactorily explained.)
 
In one city, the sun was directly overhead and no shadow was cast. In the other, the sun was angled from the stick creating a shadow producing a triangle from which the calculation was made.

⌕ Click to enlarge

This is commonly cited as proof of Earth's radius, but the assumptions used in the calculation cancel that proof.
 
For one, it's assumed that the sun millions of miles away produces parallel light rays hitting Earth. That assumption is incorrect.
 
A closer sun with divergent rays would produce the same result Eratosthenes got. A closer sun would totally dismantle the spinning ball cosmology, including the 3959 radius.
 
Also, the triangle used in the calculation had a level baseline, not a curved one as a curved Earth would produce. Other methods which use angles measured to stars suffer the same set of assumptions.
 
All such attempts at proof avoid a direct measurement of the Earth. When that is done, the 3959 radius does not fit reality, as the following will show.
 
 
WE SEE TOO FAR
The 3959 radius Earth curve would create a hump that impedes viewing objects at a distance. Similarly, if we watch a car ahead of us curve around a mountain road it would disappear behind the mountain.
 
The geometrical horizon--the distance it's possible to see, as opposed to the horizon we do see-- is a location described by a formula that considers the observer's height: 

1.225 X square root of observer's height in feet

According to this formula, a six-foot-tall person standing on the beach can see about 3 miles before the geometric horizon hump of a 3959-radius spherical Earth would start hiding the object being viewed.
 
The problem is, we can see further than what the geometric horizon should allow. In fact, some tests of distance would require a radius of Earth 100 times or more larger than it is said to be. A huge radius would reduce the height of the hump and move the limit of the geometric horizon much further away.
 
For example, even casual observation tells us the sun sets way beyond the geometric horizon.

⌕ Click to enlarge

​Actual measurements confirm casual observations.
 
-Seeing Canigau mountains 175 miles away that should be hidden below 3000 feet of Earth's curvature  

▶️ Click to play video

​-Mountains photographed 273.4 miles away should be hidden below 9.4 miles of the Earth's curve.

▶️ Click to play video

​-Alp mountains viewed that are over 700 miles away should be hidden below almost 50 miles of the Earth's curve

▶️ Click to play video

​-Views of Chicago from Michigan should be impossible.

⌕ Click to enlarge


⌕ Click to enlarge

​SEEING THE HORIZON WAY BEYOND WHERE IT IS SAID TO BE
Modus tollens is a logical argument resulting in falsification (if P, then Q; if not Q, then not P). For example, if all swans are claimed to be white, even one black swan falsifies that claim.
 
Here's how that's applied confuting the 3959 radius claim.

---

The Black Swan Modus Tollens:
 
If the Earth is a sphere with a radius of 3959 miles, then EVERY horizon distance measurement MUST BE NO MORE THAN: 1.225 x square root of the observer's height in feet (Geometric Horizon: Curve Calculators).
 
In this demonstration, the of the camera was 3.25 feet above tide level.
 
Accordingly, the distance to the Geometric Horizon is: Square root of 3.25 x 1.225 = 2.21 miles (3.56 km)
 
So, with the camera 3.25 feet above water level, the Geometric Horizon is 2.21 miles (3.56 km) away from the camera.
 
That means the bottom of the wind turbines "meeting" the sea should not be observed.
 
That means the horizon behind the wind turbines should not be observed.

---

▶️ Click to play video

REFRACTION
The most common response to the above and similar observations is refraction bending light thus permitting visibility up, over, and beyond the obstructing curve of the Earth.
​ 
Refraction is defined as the bending of light rays as they pass through one medium into another.

⌕ Click to enlarge

​For example, light passing through the medium of air bends as it enters water.

⌕ Click to enlarge

However, refraction does not apply to the above long-distance observations because:

• Refraction would have to bend light the same 8 inches per mile squared described above. This escapes credibility and proof.
  ​
  

• Refraction obscures and diminishes things. It doesn't bring clarity to things in the distance It doesn't bring clarity to things in the distance or permit seeing around corners or an Earth ball so we can see the back of our heads.

 
 
BOATS AND OTHER THINGS DISAPPEARING BOTTOM-UP
Refraction partly explains why things in the distance disappear from the bottom up. Air temperature and pressure at the surface is a different medium than air temperature and pressure higher. That difference in medium distorts distant objects and causes them to escape our vision.
 
Waves, moisture, air density at the surface of the water, and the angular resolution by our eyes obscure distant things. 

▶️ Click to play video

​Boats seeming to disappear in the distance is perhaps the most popular proof used for Earth's curvature. 
 
However, we all learned in our early school year art class about linear perspective and the vanishing point.
 
As a reminder, notice in each of the following pictures that distant things appear to become smaller before they disappear entirely. They are not disappearing down over the edge of an Earth ball. Nor is that what our art teacher taught us.

⌕ Click to enlarge


⌕ Click to enlarge


⌕ Click to enlarge

Cars don't drop down over Earth's curve, they just go away and disappear.
​

⌕ Click to enlarge

The vanishing point occurs last with the highest part of the thing being observed (like masts and smokestacks on ships). That, not an Earth curve, causes boats to disappear at the horizon bottom first.
 
When things supposedly lost down over an Earth curve are zoomed in, they reappear fully atop the land or water. 

▶️ Click to play video

Boats also seem to disappear bottom first because of the waves and dense moisture-laden air at the water surface, refraction of light due to this dense medium, and the angular resolution by our eyes.

▶️ Click to play video

​Also, consider that boats would have to go uphill or downhill on the Earth's slope. But boats experience no such thing and do not accommodate curving water with navigation or speed.
 
Here, a professor attempts to school cosmology critics about the shape of the Earth, boats disappearing over the horizon, refraction, etc. Instead, he is the one getting schooled. Caution: strong language.
 
Many more examples demonstrating why the 3959 radius for the Earth cannot be true will be covered in another part of this cosmology series. 

---

Words of Wisdom:
People who lie to themselves are not going to tell you the truth.

---

​As to why we have been indoctrinated into something entirely different than this reality, see Part 1.