Hmmm still nothing.



Surprised? I'm not.

He knows Football fields have humps to help drainage, and knows his "perspective" model can't withstand scrutiny.

I didn't say he said that, I was cleverly suggesting he did as that is your main tactic as you admit.



Every time you post I point out your absurdness, just like I did I the post above. I suppose I should end my point with phrase like “slam dunk” and “destroyed” for their effectiveness to register in the vast vacuum of your mind.



I agree with you there, at least you always have a point even though its simply regurgitated textbook quasi logic nonsense.



There you go again – stating the plainly obvious, does this babble even have a point yet?



That is what you call “an opinion” and your conflating the idea of have an opinion with “my opinion on must be correct.”
Ball Earth theory is not correct because it's the consensus, it is just what you where taught.
If Science claims that 96% of the universe is Dark Matter or Dark energy and haven't the foggiest clue what it is, but feel superior in the claim that scientific theory is absolute fact and can not be denied, you have fallen prey to the dogma of the new religious faith and can not see it as such.



You've just debunked yourself for using curricular logic by claiming:
A – My Insults are fair because I believe them and I'm trying to discredit your arguments
B – My insults are not an discrediting your arguments

This is the problem with Helio-verts, they say anything and don't even realize there completely intellectually dishonest their person and its completely clear to everyone but themselves.

In closing, I would just like to point out that this is a total annihilation and slam dunk.
Smashing your nonsense once again.

Irony you debunked yourself quite few times

You weren't clever.



Except that I don't post absurdities. I post scientifically provable facts. I don't make shit up like "perspective" can make the sun move below the horizon.



If you agree with me, then maybe don't accuse me of crying to the mod team.



I had to state the plainly obvious because it is clear that the point didn't sink in. You're clinging to some desperate notion that using the term "ad hominem" means what you claim it does, when it doesn't mean that at all. I didn't ad hom you. That's the point that is clearly not getting through.



I'm not claiming that consensus makes Ball Earth fact. That would be an argument ad populum. The Earth being a ball is simply provable. I have, and can consistently post positive proof.



No, you can't read. I don't insult to discredit. I insult to insult. I discredit with statements of fact. I can do both.

Flat earther knows football fields have crowns, which is why he won't answer my question

No, you weren't clever enough to detect it, kinda like missing the point, which you always do.
I could call you a retard but I have too much class for that....



Spinning ball Earth myths are absurdities, astro-phyentific theories are just assumptions and a profound misunderstanding of exactly how you were deceived with angular perspective of the stars.
IRL 3d optical Perspective does make the Sun optically appear to go down, you're simply stuck in your 2d side view stick drawings.



I agree you're being honest here, but if doesn't give you the right to call people retarded if they don't blindly accept pictures from NASA
when even they openly admit they are composites, if you think it does perhaps this applies to yourself really.



Ad hominem is attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument. It's what members in the state Religion like yourself do all the time by insulting.
Yes, words mean things and you're just trying to side step the fact you dodge the fact you continually fail at your ability to spin your blatantly false rhetoric.



Yes you are claiming the spinning Ball is proved with consensus faith, you were taught to have faith in books you never read,
in Datum you never saw, a view from Space you've never seen yourself, and a spinning Ball you were shown in grade 2 before you had time to critically think and judge.
Ball Earth is complete fantasy and of course its not provable, you still have yet to prove it, all you have left are insults and delusions.



What is this 22 words and 5 sentences, are you still in grade 2? This is where you lose all credibility with your two faced lies to yourself in a vain attempt to prop up your false ego.
You do insult to discredit and then try to back it up with accepted myths from the state. You're only fooling yourself and other fools. Spinning Ball Earth is clearly a lie, the Earth is flat, it is a realm, and it is where you will live, it is where you will die.



Doesn't understand the Scientific method is his own hypothesis, claims to understand science, dodges my question.

now Chivas is relying on calling people retards for knowing something.

Foucault's pendulum proves the Earth rotates on its axis. Prove that an absurdity.
3D optical perspective does not change an object's position relative to another object. The ANGLE between a point on a flat disc and an object positioned above it NEVER reaches zero. Your perspective argument IS absurd. An object getting smaller as it moves away from you is optical perspective. Dipping below a horizon is not.



NASA's blue marble photos being composite in no way proves the Earth isn't round. And there are plenty of NON-composite photos of the Earth taken from high Earth orbit that also show the same thing as the composites by NASA: the ball shape of the Earth.



No, ad hom is attacking the character of an opponent in an attempt to discredit their argument. I'm not discrediting your argument by being insult. I'm being insulting. I attack your arguments on their merit (or really, for their lack thereof). You know who is committing an ad hominem? YOU, with your "state religion." You attack the source in a direct attempt to discredit anything they say. LOLOLOLOL



Consensus has nothing to do with giving concrete proof of the roundness of the Earth. The consensus agrees of course, because the consensus has long known the proofs for themselves, but I have actual proofs that don't rely on "everybody else says it so it must be true."