Earth is not flat

Water: Seems like my opponent still does not understand how fluids work, water is not rigid, it changes shape based on the forces acting on it. The reason why water is curved on Earth is because of the gravitation pull to the center of Earth. Earth's gravity is a decent pull, strong enough to hold water to the center, as a result, water can curve around Earth, I have already shown this with a ball spinning with water on it, adhesive force acts as gravity and it works perfectly, even though it was spinning. Fluids do not have any form of rigidity. This is all very nice, but you're making far too many assumptions here. Tiny droplets of water may adhere fine to a ball or basically anything that has a surface. http://c8.alamy.com... But when more than just a drop is measured, the body of water maintains a level surface. My opponent assumes the ball earth, so he can then assume that water will be affected by gravity in a way that males it curve. When any body of water is measured however, that body has been found flat, in any experiment measuring it. By making several assumptions here, my opponent makes an unevidenced claim, but never conclusively proves anything. "So if you increased the water and also the mass of the sphere, it would remain on it because of gravity." Another unevidenced claim. Where is this curved body of water.? If the earth is a ball, every surface of calmed water must form an arced surface. "People tend to float in space because of the lack of gravity there. But then again, I cannot prove that these are real, and you cannot prove that they are fake, so we'll need to leave NASA out of this then. But every other space agency from Russia (who agreed USA went to the moon despite their huge rivalry), Japan, China, etc. They all have pictures of a spherical Earth, so clearly it's not just NASA who appears to want to pretend we live on a big ball earth." I've explained how unverifiable images should not constitute as undeniable proof of anything. There is substantial empirically validatable evidence to the contrary, so we can afford to be skeptical of any photos. "Curvature spotted, no fisheye lens: https://www.youtube.com...; A random video from youtube, very nice... but what makes the wide angle (fish eye) lens distort straight lines and bends them? Curved glass in the lens. All lenses have some degree of bend in them. The description of the video alledges the camera is a "gopro 3 silver and 4 black" gopros are known for their fisheye lenses, and it is less apparent, but a sharp eye will catch it. Concave earth stills from the video. I pulled a still from very close to the apex of it's flight and put a straight edge on it. Looks flat to me. I got them from the original video in the description of my opponent's video. http://www.debateisland.com... http://www.debateisland.com... http://www.debateisland.com... "If you look at the stars in Australia and UK, not only are they different, they rotate in the opposite directions (counter-clockwise in UK and clockwise in Australia)" Again, you pointing at the sky and saying that THEY rotate in any direction at all is not proof that the earth is moving. My opponent will have us believe that we are moving at rates of up to 1,000 miles per hour, but that the earth is too big to notice it. 1,000 miles per hour is still 1,000 miles per hour. Faster than the speed of sound. Of course my opponent may give excuses for it not being detectable in any way, because the notion of anything other than a spinning ball is not acceptable. Mental gymnastics must be performed to grasp this concept when all one has to do is open their eyes and use their God given senses with the scientific method to figure it out. "Why it doesn't make sense that NASA is hiding the "true shape of Earth": If NASA was lying and giving all these so called "fake CGI images" then why are they telling you how they get a photograph and fix it up? They would claim all the pictures were real, not to mention that every single space agency agrees that the Earth is round, so basically every space agency is lying to you, correct?" All in all, my opponent's burden was not met. There is no curved water for one. He admits this obvious and observable fact in the beginning round, basically conceding it then. There is no detectable motion either. We can see the celestial bodies moving around above us, but this doesn't mean that we are moving along under them. Everything we can observe as unbiased observers on this earth is flatness (of water) and lack of motion. To take anyone's word for anything else is pseudoscience. My opponent may be gullible enough to take unverifiable images on a computer as scientific evidence for something that goes against our senses and everything that we observe, but the time has come to be more skeptical about whay the institutions and governments of the world are saying without evidence. Now now, don't worry, it's not NASA doing some crazy pretend globe earth with their photoshop and CGI. This video here attempted to prove a flat earth but he recorded the curvature, I know you are going to claim fisheye lens but that would be impossible because he flapped the camera around and the shape did not change at all, suggesting the lens are not distorted and that the curvature has been spotted. thus proving the globe earth. Refuted. Proof of rotation: If you look at the stars in Australia and UK, not only are they different, they rotate in the opposite directions (counter-clockwise in UK and clockwise in Australia), you can't feel the rotation because 1000 mph is very slow for a big giant sphere, you wouldn't feel much of it in a plane, so it's obvious why you can't feel it on Earth, you are moving with it. Again, the first point is a strawman. Looking at stars rotating does not prove the earth is a spinning ball. Why it doesn't make sense that NASA is hiding the "true shape of Earth": If NASA was lying and giving all these so called "fake CGI images" then why are they telling you how they get a photograph and fix it up? They would claim all the pictures were real, not to mention that every single space agency agrees that the Earth is round, so basically every space agency is lying to you, correct? Yes. We have empirical and common sense proof in the basic observation of the physics of water. My opponent admits. It falls flat in every measurable circumstance. This is impossible if the earth were a ball. Horizon dip angle: I got these numbers from the horizon dip angle, this video explains it. https://www.youtube.com...... Sorry, didn't get to that part of that long winded strawman video. My opponent chooses to ignore the question about what degree drop a 100,000+ foot drop should show, and fails to show his math on the matter. Lunar eclipses: When a lunar eclipse is coming, you can clearly see the shadow of earth being a sphere, and it's already too obvious that earth is not a flat disk, so therefore this alone is enough to prove that Earth is a confirmed sphere. A late round point that is also a strawman. He points, once again to the sky to prove that water is curved. What then of selenelions, where the sun and moon are both above the horizon so that the earth, even if it were proved to have curvature or axial or orbital rotation, could not possibly come between? https://youtu.be... Notice how the shadow comes from above, not from below as would be expected if the earth caused the shadow. Nice try, but try again youngastronomer.