Here is how the calculations actually work.

To find the area of a circle using its circuмference, you can divide the circuмference by π to get the diameter, then divide the diameter by 2 to get the radius, and finally square the radius and multiply by π

The area of a flat surface with a circuмference of 25000 miles is about 50000 sq miles.  (Fact check: The United States is 3,796,742 square miles in total area.)  Something does not add up?

If you convert said NASA data to a flat earth then the circuмference of 25000 miles is actually the diameter of the earth.

If you used this as a calculation then the are you are working with is 490,873,852 sq miles.  The salt flats are then only a very small part of the earths surface. 

If you measure this as a sphere then you get more square miles to work with.

You are correct in one sense, and the 16 percent was incorrect for just one area, but while the circuмference is supposedly 25,000 miles of a globe, numerous similar areas involved would still create huge malformations, and collectively do not allow for a spherical shaped earth.  Remember, we only touched on two such areas, but there are many more.  In fact, the ocean is one of them and that is more than 1/2.     

So why would you believe math when your first attempt got the math way wrong?

Ladislaus, which video was taken down? Maybe I saved it off, and can upload it to Bitchute or something.

I don't recall which one it was exactly, but one of the two in your OP was gone a few days later.  I think it was the one that showed footage of a rocket or balloon close to 300,000 feet ... so higher than the typical amateur balloons.

I found one that's close enough

This is a simulation showing what it would look like if you increased in altitude on a GLOBE. The horizon would drop. All the while the ground still appears to ramp up just like the hall way floor. Hallways do not prove flat earth.

That channel has some interesting p1000 videos and pictures.

Like this one demonstrating how FE's fake the FE sunset claiming that the sun gets further away instead of going below the horizon. The slow shutter speed of the camera along with the increasing amount of fog or clouds in front of the sun make it look like the sun is shrinking. In this video the sun is made to shrink and grow while it is still high in the sky simply by changing the shutter speed.




I've never thought to search for geostationary sattelites, but it should be way easier than taking pictures of stars, only my camera is limited to a 30 second shutter duration. I may still try it.

That's nice and all but the simulation doesn't match reality.  Plenty of videos, including high-altitude balloons/aircraft, show the horizon does not drop.

That may be your bias, because we naturally look for the horizon since we don't live 500 miles in the sky. Surely you understand that the simulation proves the hallway example doesn't prove FE.