>>21750947>Not on the horizon but near ground.thats what i said.
> But sudden refraction (a gust of cold air) would have to show yet it doesn't.such a small amount of change when you['re looking through many km of air anyway is a very slight alteration. in fact, these very small changes are exactly what high mag telescope have to compensate for to get sharp images - this is what causes the shimmering of stars.
Not big changes...small changes, constantly, leading to an unsteady image at high magnification.
>It's weirder that you accept it even though you've never seen it and can't show it.thats exactly what you are seeing in thos long distance shots. unless you want to deny that refraction occurs at all, and feel free to publish your grant rebuttal im sure it will be very useful to all the guys working on telescopes and many other optical instruments, then its a know effect, measured in labs, always there.
all it takes for you to believe something is apparently seeing it in a youtube video or a meme. i wonder which is better and more widely supported by multiple different people over many years in different places etc?
