Planet X: Red Light BENDING Evidence

In Article <c6cdf9f8.0204230235.70ddf563@posting.google.com> Open Minded wrote:
> It is true that many people think that the
> sun and moon are larger near the horizon even though
> it is not true. That is a well known psychological effect.  

From a discussion in 1995, on sci.astro, thread Re: Gargantuan Moon, is it Real?  
Kicked off by the question:
> I have personally seen the moon look roughly twice it's
> "normal" size when it is full and near the horizon, but I
> never seen it larger. 
> does the moon look larger on the horizon because the light
> has to travel through more atmosphere?
>
> David

The answers are that
1. its an optical illusion because you have objects to compare against

In Article <Pine.CVX.3.91.950312093127.18886B-100000@gibbs.oit.unc.edu> M Lee Clapp writes:
> When the moon is high in the sky, you have nothing 
> to judge its size against, but when the moon is near the 
> horizon, objects in you field of view give you some 
> size correlations. 

2. using a ruler you’ll see it’s the same size, even on film

In Article <3k541q$rgt@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> Dan Suzio wrote:
> You could also try photographing the moon several times in 
> one night, as it moves across the sky.  All the images on the 
> film will be the same size, in spite of what your eyes and 
> brain have just told you. 

BUT, I have myself measured a HUGE rising moon coming up over a
neighbor's roof against the roof, and a few minutes later as it had risen
further but still at the roof top, and it diminishes in size almost by
half.  It’s that moment when it is just appearing, same as the dawn, or
in the case of a sunset, just as it is going down.  Thus, the “ruler” is
the same, from moment to moment, and there is a size difference.  Up in
the sky, overhead, no.  AT the horizon, just rising or setting, yes. One
gentleman, quoted below, DID find the captured image on film differing,
too!

In Article <farnum-1503950726020001@via-annex2-34.cl.msu.edu> Don Farnum wrote:
> Actually, I have photographed the moon just above the 
> horizon and at several intervals until it reached apogee 
> (straight overhead). The images on the film were not the 
> same size. When viewed at the enlarger the moon near 
> the horizon was about the size of a quarter, while when 
> overhead, it was about the size of a nickel