So I can't help pondering on what appears to be an interesting situation.

Anyone who wants to argue that the black swan is about refraction and isn't about the existence of horizons runs the risk of looking complicit in the hiding the secret.

(I had to comment since there's no end to this confusion.)

The black swan is

*neither*. At least not according to the author cited by

@Rory in this post on the second page of this thread. It's

*that* author who is the one invoking the modus tollens scheme of "John" a.k.a. Quantum Eraser and

*that author only* that I've been commenting on when discussing the 'black swan'

*invoked by the FEer against the glober.*
According to

*that *author

**the black swan is about the horizon in the oil rig photo ***being too far* for globe to be true. To

*that* author the black swan is

**not **about whether the horizon exists at all

**nor** is it about refraction. I have no clue nor interest in what

*other* black swans other FEers invoke to disprove globe.

And once more: The main issue in QE's calculation -- which we've revisited until nothing but mouldering bones are left of the dead horse -- is that it deals with

*a geometric horizon* while the oil rig photograph invoked as proof of the too-distant horizon demonstrates strong refraction for everyone to see and is, therefore, evidently for any sensible person

*an apparent horizon* (read: heavily refracted horizon, further away) rather than a geometric one (read: non-refracted which would have to be closer).

**If** the oil rig photo in actual fact shows the geometric horizon, the modus tollens argument of QE would be valid and the black swan thereby demonstrated.

And

*of course*, the hardline FEer would

*never* accept refraction as a factor. Because if he would and if it were included in the QE's calculation of the distance of the horizon, he'd be calculating the distance of

*the apparent horizon* which would indeed be far away and would match globe geometry just fine.

*Neither* will the hardcore FEer ever admit that the oil rig picture contains clear evidence of refraction that would explain both the heavy distortions on specific features of the photograph and the significant distance of the horizon behind the oil rig.

I hope we can settle this once and for all.