I don't know if the Globers have any truly difficult questions for Flat Earth, but I have a question for them: Why use this lame piece of "evidence" which is not evidence at all? Are they *desperate* for evidence or something?

This is the surest sign of intellectual dishonesty, to keep re-using evidence that's been clearly debunked.  You STILL have globers out there claiming that the curvature of the earth can be seen from commercial aircraft, despite the fact that their guru Neil de Grasse Tyson says that there would be no curvature visible from even 120,000 feet.  They cling to contradictory evidence.  They cling to ANY evidence they find that MAY support their agenda, which is to save the globe at all costs.

One of the most blatant displays of this intellectual dishonesty is when globers see evidence for FE, they just shout "refraction," as if that word by itself suffices to win the debate.  On the other hand, when they find a picture where things appear to be cut off at the bottom, suddenly that's PROOF of Globe Earth.  So what happened to the possibility of refraction and other atmospheric phenomena?  Such things ONLY come into play when the evidence runs counter to their globe, but disappear when evidence seems to point to a globe.  That is absolutely pathetic but is in fact their general modus operandi.

Here's the thing about FE.  No Flat Earther started out as a Flat Earther, while all Globe Earthers started out as Globe Earthers, having been programmed, propagandized, and brainwashed into it from an early age.

I was very skeptical in the beginning, and it took me two years of considering and weighing the evidence to become an FE.  And it wasn't because the evidence was unconvincing.  Instead, I kept telling myself that I must be missing something that could be used to explain it.  No one is excited by the prospect of being derided and ridiculed for being an FE.

Matthew wasn't particularly open to FE, as he relegated FE to a semi-hidden sub-forum.

Several prominent FEs got started by attempting to debunk it, thinking it was a psy-op from the government to discredit those who questioned the moon landings and felt that FE was discrediting them.

As I said, I was very skeptical at first, but from time to time I would take a look in the FE sub-forum to see what it was all about.  There was much there that got me thinking and questioning things that I had never questioned before.  I've had a very open mind pretty much since 9/11, after which time I came to realize that if the government's lips were moving, they were lying.  So I certainly did not rule out a conspiracy or a pack of lies from the "establishment".  But the programming was strong in me, and it took me about 2 years to completely shake it.  There was something always nagging in the back of my mind preventing me from completely accepting FE.  I would post that I "lean FE", but that's about as far as I would go for 2 years.  So, despite being open minded, this psychological programming was always there tugging at the back of my brain.  In addition, there's the prospect of being derided, mocked, and ridiculed.  Between these two, I got to a point where unless I was 110% sure, I wasn't going to commit.  Well, I eventually got to that point, where I sat down and objectively considered that the globe was absolutely untenable.

Whenever I'm considering a topic, I try to take the "devil's advocate" approach.  I perform a kind of mind experiment, where I pretend that I am an adherent of the opposite position and then pretend to be debating an opponent with the opposite views.  In this state of mind, if I can't come up with anything remotely convincing, this validates the opposite position.  It's not unlike the scholastic approach of considering the contrary opinions.  I've tried pretending that I'm a Globe earther debating and attempting to refute a Flat Earther.  I've got nothing that's convincing, unless I'm being dishonest.  I could say, "Muh NASA".  But that would be dishonest, and I would throw that out there only if I was being intellectually dishonest, since NASA is a load of crap.  I could throw the word "refraction" out there, but I would know that it's BS when I had nothing else.  I can honestly not come up with anything that I could convincingly use to argue for Globe Earth.

I still remain open to some theory where the earth's electro-magnetic field somehow causes light to bend perfectly around the globe ... but no such theory has ever been proposed, and modern science denies that light can bend except possibly a tiny amount (that's insufficient to explain curving around the globe) next to massive objects like the sun.  They claim that they detected a tiny amount of light bending as it passes the sun (which they claim to be some massive body), but otherwise, light does not bend due to gravity or electromagnetism, except in tiny amounts next to incredibly massive objects.  Also, if one were to revive the notion of "ether," one could propose a theory that there's a flow of ether going around the globe that causes light to move around the globe.  So I remain open to new theories ... but the current theories to explain the bending of light around the globe are total crap.

I just thought of something --

Quo Vadis, YOU are the one who is disturbed by the truth of Flat Earth. Why don't YOU go do these experiments? Ladislaus and I are both already convinced the earth is not a globe. Why would we spend big money and/or time proving something we already know to be true?

But let's say we did, because we love you.

Would you believe us? Would you believe our testimony? After all, you don't believe countless evidence others have done, despite rigorous methodology (announcing beforehand, docuмentation, giving all details of the experiment so other true scientists can verify the findings). So you're all the sudden going to believe various members of CI if one of US were to do these same experiments?

I leave you with Luke chapter 16, because it's the perfect analogy for this situation:

27 And he said: Then, father, I beseech thee, that thou wouldst send him to my father's house, for I have five brethren,  28 That he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torments.  29 And Abraham said to him: They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.  30 But he said: No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will do penance.
 31 And he said to him: If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead

You did no such thing.  You posted a couple of pictures that you claimed were evidence of something but proved nothing.  You provided no data (which all the FEs do in their experiments), and I clearly explained why your picture proved nothing.  I even struggled to understand what you were trying to prove in the first place, since I saw nothing in those pictures which was evidence of anything.

You did no such thing.  You posted a couple of pictures that you claimed were evidence of something but proved nothing.  You provided no data (which all the FEs do in their experiments), and I clearly explained why your picture proved nothing.  I even struggled to understand what you were trying to prove in the first place, since I saw nothing in those pictures which was evidence of anything.

That is a blatant lie. I wasted my time doing a ridiculous experiment with magnifying glasses that supposedly showed how water droplets magnified the sun as it was setting. It proved the video you posted was a fake. You rejected that out of hand. You also rejected my first hand observations of using two different telescopes that showed the horizon obscured a bridge on the other side of a 20 mile long lake.