Destroy Yourself

Sorry I'm posting this argument with 1 hour remaining, but I'd better do so now. Let's get into this.Point 1; Laws of Gravity:We all know what gravity is. It is the pull that an object exerts on a much smaller, less dense object (ex: The giant Earth is pulling much smaller people towards its center). No matter where you are, you're being pulled towards Earth's center. Which brings me to my main point: The earth has a diameter of 7,926 miles, or 12,756 kilometers (From the equator). This is pretty big. Are you going to tell me that the planet itself can stay a flat disk if the diameter is that much? Note that the Earth's mass is 5.9722 x 10^24 kilograms. How can a flat disk that heavy not collapse on top of itself?Therefore, the notion that the Earth is flat is ridiculous! [Source for Earth's size: http://www.space.com...][Don't believe gravity exists, for some reason? Jump. Explain why you fell back down to the Earth.]Point 2: Satellite images[Sources: https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com... , https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com... ]I think these two are enough. If you need more pictures, for some reason, just go to Google Images.As you can see, these two photos of Earth are from different angles, taken by satellite. Assuming we're taking photos of a flat disk, you'd probably see it as an oval from most angles. Here, the Earth has 2 photos taken of it, from 2 different areas. If you're suggesting the Earth is flat, then why is it that we're seeing a circular Earth in both images? Only a spherical shape can appear circular from multiple angles.Thus, the notion that the Earth is flat is ridiculous!Point 3: Time zonesIt's afternoon by the time I'm posting this. Probably 12:00 somewhere else. 2:00 elsewhere. How can this be? If the Earth were a flat disk, the the sun would only be shining on one side of the Earth, meaning America's time would be the same as Europe, but opposite of China, or even day would never end! This is not the case, however.http://www.timeanddate.com...Up there is a site that lists the different times in various countries. Again, this is not possible with a flat disk. Just try it with paper and a flashlight. Try to get time zones.Pro's objection to this source is most likely a conspiracy; he'll claim the source is lying. If he does choose to take this path, he must show that A: It is indeed lying, and B: A motive for lying.I have enough characters to start a rebuttal, so I'll go ahead and do so.Rebuttal:Point 1: Disproving the Earth is RoundMy opponent first attempts to refute a source. Let's see how successful it is."Firstly, note how it completely ignores the topic of what precisely constitutes "flat"." And by flat, you mean "horizontally level; level, even, or without unevenness of surface". The source does contain numerous examples of even, flat surface vs rounded surfaces. I don't see what Pro is talking about. Please go into more detail."a round sphere can be so stretched apart that it seems to be mostly "flat"." If you're referring to the Earth, how it is being stretched out? If you're talking about the shadow, it's always 2D."The source does not even address if Earth is enough to constitute for a perfect sphere, so that argument is out." Whether the Earth is a perfect sphere is irrelevant all Pro needs to do is show that the Earth is Flat, and I have to only show that it isn't flat. Just bringing that up."Neatly, the author addresses that ships appear into a field of a vision due to a "horizon". However, once again we think about it and we question about the nature of "flatness". Yes, let's question the nature of flatness... which is paper.Let's do an experiment. Our ship can be whatever small object you choose. Paper will be the ocean. Let's set both of these on a table. Much like paper, the ocean has no bumps. Both are flat; not uneven. Are you to tell me some bump is going to not let me see my pencil on a flat, uneven piece of paper? Ridiculous!"Aristotle claimed that the sphere of the Earth is “of no great size, for otherwise the effect of so slight a change of place would not be quickly apparent.” However, is Aristotle trustworthy himself?" So what if an uncivilized philosopher was wrong about a bunch of things we know plenty of with science? Does being wrong plenty times discredit the validity of a different argument? No, that's just bias."Then, the author says that the shadows would be the same if you have a flat earth. But one again, we're speaking about OVERALL." Yep. We're talking about a flat disk. No unevenness.""It is impossible for anything to be PERFECTLY flat to the molecular level. No such thing exists." Perfectly flat, sure. But we can take a few centimeters difference and call it "flat", shall we?"if you have a small curve, it does not prevent a surface from being flat." Okay, what are you getting at? The Earth is HUGE, so a difference in 500 feet isn't that much of a difference in curvature. 1,000 km? Now that's a curve!"He displays diagrams instead of pictures, which is suspicious (is it that difficult to find a "flat terrain"?)" Right down to the molecular level! No such thing exists! Although a photo is more reliable, do you expect me to go to an area like the diagram shows? 1: Where am I supposed to find a flat disk to stand on? 2: Most people probably won't go that far. Diagram is the easiest way to obtain a flat, uncurved, plain.He then goes on to say that the author doesn't show that the Earth isn't flat. How similar is a regular circle compared to a giant sphere? I see the giant curve, the Earth can't be flat. Axis doesn't do anything with day/night, which is what time zones is all about. I already discussed gravity. Pro needs to prove that the images were photoshopped.Point 2: Fusion.net"note that he never states what WOULD have sunlight looked like HAD the earth been flat, which is clearly bias" I'll have to concede this point. A comparison would have been nice, so let's do it for them! Light is curving via the atmosphere, as the source says. There is little to no curvature with a flat Earth. Straight/lightly curved lines vs more curved lines. The source does prove that light curves quite a bit.Point 3: More refutation!"The moon, he noted, was also a sphere, so it would follow that the Earth is round as well." This is completely illogical. The sun is a star, so is therefore also earth? There is no logic behind this." Point taken. But there's so much more evidence to deal with. Overwhelming, in fact! "just two people doesn't seem like overwhelming to me." The source never exactly states "overwhelming". Plus, there's much more evidence suggesting the Earth is spherical in shape, other than 2 ancient Greek philosophers from before we got space ships and satellites.Observation: So, accordin to the rules, we refute sources, instead of using them to strengthen our arguments. So I guess that is a thing, but what sites would I refute, really? I'm not going to look. Instead, I'll just post my contructive argument. Good luck to Pro, I'm going to take a break.