Scientific evidence overwellmingly supports a flat earth

His rebuttals are full of err.intuitionHere, pro enters the realms of pre-science to prove his theoryohhhh this is gold. He say intuition is pre-science. Heres the gold, science is based on intuition. if u reject intuition your position is self refuting because u reject science. The FET is the only coherent positiion to accept science. In order to believe the earth is round u must believe it is flat. Slef refuting, therefore the FET is true. However these exist alongside forward, right left and backwards.Comeon, this is against intuition. It funny, con never refutes this argument, he tell us what round earth theory is.Experamental proofBedford experamentThis experament wasn't done once. Look at con's source"Mr Yule Oldham on his re-measurement of the curvature of the Earth along the Bedford Level."Mr. Yule did do an experament but he wasnt the ONLY one. Mr. Yule's experaments being invalid, dont invalidate all experaments. Samuel Birley Rowbotham did the experament serveral times with professinals. Con does no refute experament by Lady Anne Blount and Clifton. He responded to a different experament not the one i sourced.The only time the experament showed a curved earth was by Ulysses Grant Morrow. His experament was invalid, this is concensios [1]Rebuttal es fail.Hey! Where my argument from kansis go? Con forgot or ignored because he cant refute. Kansis should show a sh1t load of curvature. Hey where my mariners argument go? I win on those two.Con gives no proof of curvature present on maps. Maps are flat not curved!I beg you to go on, it seems that your dubious website has run out of sources so I encourage you to find some more to support your hypothesis. - Conlol, where's your proof? Con has almost none. Lets look at his1: Earth from spaceHe dropped it. He say The first half was about NASA being a supposedly fake organisation, which is totally irrelevant to the resolution so all this will be ignored. Are you kidding? Its your entire argument! No NASA, no picture of earth no argument for you? I win on this point2. Sinking Ship effectCon ignore my other two point about the ship effect proving flat earth.Your source here was totally unreliable and there have been no experiments which prove what you are saying.How can it be unreliable? Why? He say no experiment show it i gave source. Get me this, i give source to con and he will say its unreliable. This make Cons position unfalsifiable and science requires falsifacation. Why not me just reject all of cons sources without sayign why they suck? Thats what con did. I should win on that.3: Possible to Circumnavigate the GlobeNO one has circumvaigate north-south (2). And so what? The earth has a back side lol. Flat earth is not the "No back side theory". 4: TimezonesHahahaha really? Con think Im saying the sun IS a spotlight. The sun acts like a spotlight it isn't an spotlight? ROFL. A spotlight is small on an observer. The sun is big but shine like a bright spotlight. It is a type of spotlight. Con fail here tooClosing Remarks When proof comes to proof the flat earth prevails. Cons argument in round 3 is obviously weak he having problems with my case. Many think FET is not an intellectially defensable position WHy is con having so much trouble with my arguments? He ignore 2 and drop his argument. I win, sorry but it true.(1) http://www.lhup.edu... (2) http://en.wikipedia.org...