Earth Is Absolutely Immobile

In this round I am not going to produce any additional proofs; instead I will prove that your arguments and sources are invalid and/or contridicts yourself: Therefore proving that the debate is over and you have lost.1: "I didn't suggest it. I proved it by quoting Galileo himself."The source you give: http://law2.umkc.edu... show that Galileo stated that he was wrong. However, you say that: "And by the way, that letter I quoted from Galileo, well, it was to a colleague, not to the Inquisition."When the site that you provided clearly shows him saying: "I, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, arraigned personally before this tribunal, and kneeling before you, Most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors-General "He directs his statement to the Inquisitors-General! Not only does your quote not come from the site you provided, it contridicts your argument!2: "It's called paraphrasing bro."You say that your paraphrasing but you don't provide further information on what you changed in the quote. Instead, you ignore your mistake and manipulation, and move on to the next topic. Showing me and the audience that the paraphrased quotes have no meaning.3: "Hubble had serious doubts that red-shifts meant galaxies were moving away from us."OK. But in the previous argument you said that: "Hubble's Law only says that the red-shift of galaxies can show they are moving away from us."Now we have a problem: You used Hubble's Laws in two different ways: 1) By defining it 2) By un-defining itAnother proof that your argument makes no sense.4: "Really? You don't think the gravity of billions of stars and galaxies is strong enough to knock a little pendulum a tiny bit off course? Then I guess you don't believe the one moon has enough gravity to cause tides in the massive ocean."HaHa. You said that the small gravity of the moon can cause large tides... But: 1) Doesn't that mean that the moons gravity would affect Foucault's pendulum? Yet it doesn't? 2) And if large stars and galaxies are bigger than the moon... Whouldn't we have more tides? Yet we don't?And you provide no factual evidence to back yourself up. You can't even refute Foucault's pendulum (http://en.wikipedia.org.....) because you don't have facts other than some faulty quote from one guy! Making your argument (again) with no value.5: "No lol. Mars orbits the sun, but the sun orbits Earth. That would be crazy for Mars to do that."That is the only thing you write to refute my argument... Proving that: 1) You are too lazy to find legit proof 2) You know that I'm right and you have no proofThen you go back to The Axis of Evil which is after all (words by you): "The chance that Earth would be in the middle of the Axis of Evil is less than 0.1%. And remember, I already proved the universe rotates around this axis in the last round. This means the universe rotates around Earth!"You just said yourself that the chance of the Axis of Evil actually having any relationship to Earth is "less than 0.1%".Yet you decide to avoid my Mars argument to re-define a already dead point... 6: "The atmosphere proves the Earth is immobile. If Earth were really shooting through space at 66,000 mph and spinning at 1,000 mph at the same time, you would get blown away as soon as you walked outside."This is getting fun. We wouldn't get blown away because of a thing called the atmosphere and gravity..."Earth has more atmosphere than most of the other inner planets for two reasons: (1) gravity, and (2) volcanism. Being the most massive of all of the inner planets, Earth can hold more atmosphere to its surface by its gravity alone. Furthermore, volcanos continually spew out gasses into the Earth's atmosphere at a rate faster than they escape into space. Unlike Venus, however, which has an even thicker atmosphere, Earth also has oceans where gasses in the atmosphere are removed and crystallized into rocks."http://scienceline.ucsb.edu...Look at the sources and read it yourself. I would love to see you try to refute this point.7: "They are caused by the Coriolis Force which I explained is caused by the rotation of the stars around Earth."The only proof that you have showing us that the Coriolis affect is caused by stars is a faulty quote with no source!I don't even need to provide my own source but I will:NOVANow that I have undermined pretty much all of your arguments, quotes, and statements with 7 points, The next round will be for my own entertainment. Great Debate!