You don't have to explain science to me Tito, I understand it perfectly.



By all means poke fun, because you know you can't provide actual proof for your globe.

So you post a vid that doesn't have 1 proof for the globe?

It starts out by mentioning the Flat Earth Society and celebrities. I have already mentioned that they are disinformation agents. It's the main reason that Mark Sargent is always flashing his little disc model, it gives ball earthers something to attack, because they can't provide anything quantifiable for the globe.

Then he mentions pictures from space. But doesn't provide any scientific evidence that a gas can be created without a container, or where we can observe this occurrence in the natural world.



He also mentions 'live' satellite images, again without any any scientific evidence that a gas can be created without a container, or where we can observe this occurrence in the natural world. And I'll leave this vid so you can see how that's done:



He then invokes a red herring in talking about the sky. Tell me again how looking at the sky gives us anything quantifiable for the ground beneath our feet?

I lost interest after that, but did hear him mention that magic baller word 'gravity'. So tell me again where we observe mass attracting to mass in the natural word? And where Newton observed this originally in nature. An apple dropping right? I wonder how water runs down a mountain? Surely the mountain has more mass. You did't answer my previous question about the 2 substances of the same weight, would they both fall?

So did your vid provide any measurable curvature?

Did it provide scientific evidence that a gas can be created without a container, or where we can observe this occurrence in the natural world?

Did it provide scientific evidence of the motion of the earth?

Did it provide scientific evidence of mass attracting to mass in the natural world?

We both know the answer.