Flerfs are extremely arrogant people who call those of us who believe in a spheroidal earth as "globetards." In their universe, there is no such thing as gravity. Heavy things fall, you see, because of density. This is demonstrably false because common sense would tell you that the denser an object is, the faster it falls. A cannonball would fall faster than a baseball because it is denser. Is this true? No, of course not. They fall at the same speed because gravity acts uniformly and universally on all objects at all times. Some flerfs are so dumb that they will compare a cannonball and a feather. The cannonball falls faster, they say, because it is denser. Of course, it falls faster because air is entrapped in the feather making it more buoyant in air. Yes, you have to explain that to them.
I have devised an observation that prove the earth is round that few if any flerfs have ever thought of. When I presented it to them, I received no reply. Here it is:
In the old days, ships in the Arctic wanted to avoid ice because it could tear a ship open. To spot the ice as far away as they could, they used what they called the "blink ice." Ice and snow reflects light. A great deal of ice and snow reflects a lot of sunlight. If you look to the horizon and it looks bright and white, then you know there is ice over the horizon that the sunlight is bouncing off it up to the sky. So avoid that area. The opposite effect is called "the water-sky" where you are surrounded by ice but want to find open ocean. Look at the horizon and look for a dark patch. That's open ocean because it's not reflecting sunlight like ice does. So my question is that if the earth is flat, why would you need to look at the horizon for the ice when the ice floats above the water level and so would be directly visible with at least binoculars if not the naked eye? Because, obviously, the ice is over the horizon and can't be seen directly and so we must look for its upwards reflection to know it's there. Flat earth disproven.
Another observation I have noticed (although I'm sure other have as well) is that we have seen volcanic activity on other worlds. We have photographs of this activity and we can clearly see this body is a spheroid:
We also have volcanoes on earth. Why should we then assume the earth is flat? This in light of how volcanoes are produced is especially problematic. Volcanoes occur when rock inside the earth melts, becomes less dense and hence more buoyant and, if the pressure of the surface is less, the rock then bursts through that surface to the outside in the form of a volcano or hotspot. Other factors as water, sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide within the lava also play a role in the explosive property of the lava and are released as hot gases. The rock in the earth heats up due to plate tectonics. Diverging or converging plates can cause rock inside the earth to melt. The problem for the flat earth model here is problematic in a couple of ways: 1) it is the earth's rotation that produced the super-hot core that causes the convection currents that cause the plates to move. If the earth were static and flat, the plates would remain stationary because there would be no hot core, 2) if the earth were a plane, what stops the lava and magma from oozing out at the edges? Flerfs say the earth is surrounded by an ice wall but that, I'm afraid, not going to be nearly enough. Moreover, we would see the steam produced by this interaction all over the South Pole (which flerfs say doesn't exist as a single locale but actually surrounds the earth plane so we should surrounded by a huge wreath of steam). But some flerfs say the earth plane is infinite in all directions. In this case, the buildup of pressure in the earth would be dispersed infinitely making volcanic eruptions an extreme rarity even if they could form on a flat earth.
An even bigger problem emerges because the planet's life would die without volcanic eruptions. Not only do a great many scientists believe volcanic eruptions started life on earth, the greenhouse gases trapped in the heat from the sun when the sun was much weaker than now allowing the surface to stay warm enough for life but later the huge ash cloud caused by eruptions cooled the earth so it didn't overheat and kill off life. Eruptions gave us CO2, water and nutrient-rich soil. Submarine eruptions also contribute to the carbon cycle and help keep it the exchange of carbon between ocean and land at a 1:1 ratio. Yet, no matter how you cut it, you can't account for volcanoes on a flat earth yet we have them just as spherical celestial bodies we have observed. Conclusion: the earth is spheroidal.
The reason most flerfs give for why the earth is flat is this: "It appears flat to my senses." Well, hellfire! We are microscopic in comparison to the earth! Of course it looks flat to our senses, for crying out loud!
Water always rests flat so how can it curve around the earth? The obvious answer is that gravity is affecting every molecule pulling each one towards the planet's center. I saw a guy with a rule sitting in a boat on a lake trying to demonstrate that the water surface is flat. For all intents and purposes it is. But a ruler is far too crude to measure the curvature. A scientific team from a university used a very large lake along with sensitive surveying equipment and lasers to prove the surface of the lake was indeed curved but so minutely that there is no way the human eye could register it. Besides, sunrise and sunset happen 20 minutes apart of the opposite shores of Lake Superior which cannot be explained by the flat earth model. The flat earth model predicts that both sides of the Lake would register sunrise or sunset at exactly the same time. They do not. You can't do the laser experiment on Lake Superior because it's so long that earth's curvature blocks the lasers from reaching the other side!!
Just yesterday, I drove home from Tennessee. I left Tennessee at 6 am before the sun rose. As I was driving north on I-75, I could see the tops of the mountains lighting up into daylight but I was still in darkness and had to have my headlights on. On a flat earth, this would not happen. On a flat earth, the ground and mountains are lit simultaneously. But my first hand observation showed this was not the case. To make matters worse, flerfs say that the sun doesn't go down, it just moves farther away (because it's a light suspended under the sky dome and circling around up there). But if the sun moved farther away, we would still see it even if we were somehow in shadow.
An airplane must constantly dip the nose down or it would fly off into space if the earth was really a globe. Since gravity acts on everything on the planet and acts constantly, there is no need to have to dip the nose of the plane or the pull would not be constant which does not line up to observation and experimentation. A plane flying off the planet into space would be defying gravity. I met a guy on Youtube who actually demanded I explain why planes don't have to dip the nose to avoid flying off into space. If you dip the nose constantly, for crying out loud, you'd crash! Show me one single qualified pilot who says you have to dip the nose constantly--just one!!!
There is nothing beyond the sky dome. Literally nothing. Flerfs say this because to admit there was anything beyond the dome is admission that space exists which they deny. There is no space, they say, all the celestial bodies are within the sky dome. If there's no space out there then there is no time either. Does this make any sense? How can you have something (the flat earth and dome) in the midst of literally nothing? Or more precisely, how can you have an island of space-time in the midst of no space-time?
All photos, films and videos of earth from space are fake and doctored up with CGI. Yep. That's what they say. They take the easiest proof that they are full of shit and simply disallow it. It destroys their case before it even leaves the dugout so they just won't allow it to matter. They point out that full earth images take from satellites are all composites. They don't understand that if you let a classroom globe represent earth, most satellites are a microscopic point floating less than a half-inch above the surface of that globe. So, no, you can't possibly fit the entire earth in a single view. You have to take many photos of every view the satellite can get and stitch them together.
One exception is Japan's Himawari-8 satellite which is in an orbit that captures the entire planet and the results are spectacular:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILyO1wSBhMw
Flerfs reject this video, of course. They don't understand that the satellite is geosynchronous orbit and so insist it shows the sun going around the earth. They ask where the stars are. The lens is pointed at and focused on the earth. Stars aren't going to be seen. It's not a telescope, it's a weather satellite. Flerfs went crazy on YT swearing the Himawari-8 footage is fake but it's just the usual conspiracy theory tripe and, of course, it's CGI!! Everything is CGI. They even claim CGI of photos and films taken before there was any such thing as CGI!!
They can't explain how every single space agency on earth all agree to fake the globe earth. The best answer you will get is that they want to control us. They seem to think they are freethinking heroes for positing the flat earth. "You were brainwashed in school!" I was told. I responded that of the two of us, I appear to be only that went to school. "You have to unlearn everything you've been taught if you want to know about the flat earth." Well, I can't argue with that!
The truth is, most of them are fundie Christians and Muslims. The earth is flat because the bible or the Quran say so. (Funny when other Christians and Muslims say their scriptures say the earth is round and so knew this before the Greeks--which isn't true no matter how you cut it.)
As far as I am concerned, the photos and other images taken from space are solid proof and if all they can say is CGI then let them. They are obviously wrong. But then what do I know? I'm just a globetard.
(Kinda like your laser proof.) For that matter, given a sufficiently powerful telescope, we should be able to stand atop say Pike's Peak and see someone standing on Mt. Fuji in Japan.
