Globe Debunked - Great Flat Lake Test

I replicated the experiment conducted by Cody's Lab and was shocked to see a distant structure that should have been hidden by the curvature in accordance with the official globe model. Of course, I disagree with the official (like Metabunk) "hidden" calculations as they fail to consider the necessary decrease in angular size. However, even assuming the official models were true, there's simply no way that the video I took above is possible under the globe model. ***** UPDATE ***** Another possible candidate structure was raised by John Michaelson who argued that the structure was a more distant water tower - 8.3 miles add (43 miles distance; coordinates: 40°39'33.20"N, 112° 4'22.09"W): https://youtu.be/GbTtV9o24v0. I don't believe the structure I filmed looks like the water tower but the angle seems correct. The object I filmed looked like it had a box structure to it but I will say there's a good possibility that it is the water tower and I definitely would have listed it in the video if I would have seen it as it did seem as though it was standing in the air. The point is that even assuming his belief is accurate about the water tower, the tower still wouldn't be visible even when using Metabunk's BS "Refracted Hidden" that has no other purpose than to level the globe. The "Hidden" figure puts the water tower ~150 feet below the curvature. Camera height = 31 inches Distance to Saltair = 34.7 miles (Metabunk "Hidden" = 714 ft; "Refracted Hidden" = 607 ft) Distance to Kennecott Smelter Stack = 36.12 miles (Metabunk "Hidden" = 779 ft; "Refracted Hidden" = 661 ft) Distance to "Think Safety" building (possible candidate) = 36.17 miles (Metabunk "Hidden" = 782 ft; "Refracted Hidden" = 663 ft) Primary video taken at about 6:00 p.m. on September 27, 2017 at Promontory Point, Utah; temperature 67-70 degrees Weather for date: https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBMC/2017/9/27/DailyHistory.html?req_city=&req;_state=&req;_statename=&reqdb.zip;=&reqdb.magic;=&reqdb.wmo;= 6:15 PM - 69.6 °F temperature - 28.9 °F Dew Point - 22% humidity 30.14 in Pressure - 10.0 mi visibility - WNW 5.8 mph wind Cody's Lab's video: https://youtu.be/AcdBFfoi3uU I believe the Great Salt Lake is completely flat. Cody's footage of the smelter stack reflection is alone proof that the globe model is false. If Cody's telescope was at 5 feet, under the "official" numbers, the horizon would had to have been 2.7 miles away from him meaning that's where the alleged bulge would have begun blocking his view. Since a reflection has no height, that means that the reflection would had to have been within 2.7 miles of Cody's telescope. Do you really believe that the reflection of an object 36 miles away jumped over the 850+ foot drop in curvature to appear within 2.7 miles of Cody's telescope? The extra big ball earth model also fails in this regard as the horizon would have to be at least dozens of miles away from the observer and that would make the earth HUGE. But is there a flat earth explanation as to why there's a small but noticeable missing bottom portion of the buildings? I believe it's an angular resolution issue; in other cases (maybe this one), it might be a closer wave/mirage/atmospheric conditions obstructing the more distant objects (i.e., an angular size/perspective issue). What makes this even more tricky is that it is probably both an angular size and an angular resolution issue and these two issues are completely different concepts. I suggest you watch the following video on angular resolution by Curious Life: https://youtu.be/bSSOphWOt0U Angular resolution is a legitimate factual issue that depends on the diameter of the lens. https://www4.uwsp.edu/physastr/kmenning/images/sb5.38.f.13.gif ["the angular resolution of an optical system can be estimated (from the diameter of the aperture and the wavelength of the light) by the Rayleigh criterion defined by Lord Rayleigh .... Point-like sources separated by an angle smaller than the angular resolution cannot be resolved"]. As you can see in the above diagram link, the two separate dots become one and that will happen with any camera. But angular resolution doesn't end with dots but must apply to any distant two objects close together. In this case, we have a smelter stack and a body of water. The diameter of the P900 lens is much larger than a human eye and so it can resolve much more but it still has limitations; it's zooming-in capabilities are still limited by the size of the lens (if that makes sense). Essentially, the angle between the water and the smelter buildings is so small, that even the P900 can't resolve the image between the two and so you get a blending effect where the two meet. Ask yourself, what would have happened if the P900 had a lens only 1/4 its size but with the same zoom? Would more, less, or the same amount of the smelter stack be visible? According to the Rayleigh criterion, much less of the stack would be visible.