CathInfo.com

Was that an attempt to gaslight us?

If there is "truth" in the Flat Earth argument(s), that means the earth is likely flat. Evidence isn't just "Hm. That's interesting."
No, it leads to necessary rational conclusions.

Basic rational thinking, a functioning brain, requires a foundation in reality and truth. For example, the principle of non-contradiction. That principle is not something you can pass over if you feel like it, or say "Huh. Interesting." and move on, as if it didn't just smash and disprove logically a widespread deception, such as NASA's Big Bang spinning balls outer space cosmological paradigm.

I only need about a dozen pieces of hard evidence that NASA lies to us before I can be morally certain they are a deceptive agency.

But in fact I have several dozen such slam-dunks, as well as many hundred pieces of less-conclusive evidence. It all points to the same conclusion, however -- "NASA is full of lies up to their neck".

And there is *way* too much evidence for flat earth, and virtually NONE for the globe, which is why I'm forced to conclude the earth is flat. Virtually all the "evidence" for the spinning ball earth comes from NASA -- it requires trust in NASA as a source. I can't grant that, sorry.

Attempt to gaslight?  Nope, not at all.  I would not try to insult your intelligence (or that of Lad's) in such a nonsensical and dishonest manner.

Of course, there is truth in the Flat Earth arguments just as there is truth in the Globe Earth arguments.  What is at issue is which argument is true in its final conclusion, not whether either of them contains elements of truth.  As a matter of fact, one argument might contain falsehoods which are actually irrelevant to the argument itself.  Those falsehoods would not in and of themselves necessarily render the argument's final conclusion false.

I completely agree with what you say above regarding the principle of non-contradiction.  I have never denied that "mother of all principles" in the least.

The fact that NASA is an evil agency in many ways (not least of which is in some its major deceptions) which I would be the last to dispute, does not necessarily lead at all to the conclusion that when it says the Earth is a globe that it is lying about that.  (As you well know, the devil is a liar, but it can also quote and does quote Sacred Scripture.  That doesn't make the Sacred Scripture false, no more than if NASA says the Earth is a globe does it make the Earth flat.  BTW, if the C.I.A. pushes the idea of a flat Earth does that make the C.I.A. a reliable agency of the truth?!)

You say above that you have "several dozen such slam-dunks."  That's just verbiage.  Both FE and GE claim they have several slam-dunks.

You say, "And there is *way* too much evidence for flat earth, and virtually NONE for the globe, which is why I'm forced to conclude the earth is flat."  Do you even realize what a bizarre and utterly preposterous false statement that is?  Your disagreement with GE and non-acceptance of its evidence does not nullify or eradicate that evidence's very existence.

You assert: "Virtually all the "evidence" for the spinning ball earth comes from NASA -- it requires trust in NASA as a source. I can't grant that, sorry."  (I have no problem believing the truth told to me by a 5-year-old who says 2 plus 2 is 4; that does not require me to trust him when he says the tooth fairy is real.)  No need to be sorry if that is what you sincerely believe, but again your statement is preposterous on its face.  There are major countries besides the U.S.A., and there are all kinds of other schools and institutions that have carried out space, astronomical, and cosmological studies that have over many years come up with evidence for a Globe Earth -- some even before NASA was even founded.

Even a 10-year-old child could observe a solar eclipse and conclude that the Earth was a globe.  Flat Earthers may counter that by saying that no, that's only evidence for a circular flat Earth.  Well, actually that evidence could be used for either side and indeed it is used by both sides.  It's simply a matter of how you wish to interpret the evidence.  Whichever side you take, it is still evidence, evidence which has been out there since time immemorial and certainly before NASA ever came into being.
 

OTHER space agencies? You SURE you want to go there?
Have you SEEN any of their footage? It makes NASA look air-tight and flawless.

THIS ^^^