The earth is a spherical shape.

I could tell that you have not done much research on the shape of the earth, this is sad, most of society is just blindly accepting what the "smart" guys tell us since birth. I call this indoctrination. I thought that maybe if you were going to go 5 rounds with a flat earther, you would at least look into it so you had some idea to what you were debating against. Maybe your research will start now. Better late than never.1) In the video the shadow of the earth is obscuring the moon from the top down rather than the bottom up, contrary to what would be expected when the earth is passing between the moon and sun. The sun's light should be peeking over the earth's horizon and hitting the moon from the top down, and the shadow would go up the moon.Are we to believe that "refraction" has not only placed both the sun and moon in opposite directions that far above the earth's surface, but has moved the shadow the wrong way to boot? We can now clearly deduce that the earth never blocks the sun's light on the moon. 2) Pro admits the strong possibility that the lunar landings were faked. Why then, since you have admitted the government (who can be proves to be one of the most unreliable sources) has lied about this, can we believe anything they say about space in general? The video I assume you were referring to is lunar waves. This anomaly has been filmed repeatedly by more than one person, with a few widely different camera and video setups, disproving equipment failure or any doctoring. Since bop is on pro, I assume he can provide proof to this claim. For more videos, simply search lunar waves on YouTube. Until pro can provide evidence that such videos are in fact doctored, the claim stands as stated in the rules. In source video 3 I provide a small demonstration about the phases and how they do not match up, if the sun were on the other side of the earth, the phases would reset every six months. Pro has ignored this point entirely. 3) It shouldn't be difficult or time/battery consuming to start filming a ship as it gets closer to the horizon, and show that it goes over any hump of water downhill, which is absurd even saying it. Until pro can provide a proof of this claim, this burden of proof has not been met. We aren't seeing a blob because at some point, the law of perspective takes over, causeing the illusion that it blends in with the horizon, the telescopes brings it back into view, as my source says, proving it does not go over a hump. Similar to watching a car go in the distance, at a point, the tires will seem to have disappeared, and the car will appear to be dragging it's undercarriage on the highway. Distance refers to the distance to the object, going along the earth's surface with the highest density of atmosphere, directly above sea level. Which brings us to the globe-trotters' catch all, gravity. Ah gravity, that magical force that (without observation) causes things over an uncertain mass to make some things stick to it, while others float around it in a circle. Not a single experiment in history, however, has shown an object massive enough to, by virtue of its mass alone, cause other smaller masses to be attracted to it as Newton claims "gravity" does with Earth, the Sun, Moon, Stars and Planets. What we can observe is that things of high density, when placed in a less dense medium will sink while less dense objects in a more dense medium rise. At what amount of mass do these magical things happen? It doesn't, it's a theory, and we're taking someone's word that it even exists. Kinda reminds me of some or most religions, telling us to believe something that can't be proven or observed in a real world environment. For gravity to exist in this way, you must first have to assume that the earth is a ball. Therefore any ideas involving gravity in this way is against the rules stated in round 1.http://beforeitsnews.com...For more gravity shenanigans. It's funny how Pro disregards all these coincidences. Is it possible that all these coincidences are in fact proof of intelligent creation? I think I have shown substantial proof of this here.Shadows and sticksFor Eratosthenes is experiment to prove a globular earth, the sun's rays have to hit the earth at a near perfect parallel. They do not as I have clearly shown in the previous round. https://youtu.be...5. Is not the coin size to the football field relevant to the person and the flat earth? As of yet Pro has provided no proof of any curvature. I also point out that pro ignores the fact that any object appearing over a curve would be leaning away from you. Since Pro has not provided any proof of this we can safely assume that at higher altitude we are not looking over the curve of a ball.I have in fact provided proof and the difference between the two lenses that are used at high altitude launches and/or NASA videos. The most obvious would be a morphing horizon, appearing to get larger and smaller and even curving outwards. I even provide a clear example of this. Watch Nazi, I mean NASA sponsored Felix Baumgartner's jump from the edge of space, the only time they don't use a GoPro camera in that video is when they use the camera that is inside the vehicle as he opens the door looking out, you can clearly see the horizon does not bend at this section in the video as it does in the rest of it. The fact that you do not see curved lines through eye glasses Is because this information is pre translated due to the subconscious telling you that the line is in fact level. Also, you are not looking through the entire lens. Only the middle. The fact that planes do not have the ability to escape velocity has nothing to do with the fact that they would be flying nose down almost constantly. Any pilot can tell you that this does not happen, they fly level with the horizon at all times. The fact that pro never offers a proof that they do fly nose down, proves that they do not make the corrected altitude measurements as described in the previous round. Gravity again is brought up in this argument, so I will provide another proof that gravity in this sense does not exist. Planets are said to have an elliptical orbit around the Sun, how can this be possible when Newton's law depend on distance showing what the strength of gravity should be, if distance is decreased, then gravity should increase, what opposing force is pulling these planets back out away from their closer point of orbit around the Sun?Honestly I thought if you were going to debate the shape of the earth, and provide pictures as proof as you did in round one, you would be able to correctly identify even portions of suppposed pictures of Earth from space, it appears I am wrong, I will provide links to the images used above directly from official sources.https://www.flickr.com...http://m.earthobservatory.nasa.gov... https://www.nasa.gov... Pro does not try to refute the to prove that I provided at the end of the last round, so we will assume that he concedes to these proofs. I will quickly try to answer pros questions. The sun is about 32 miles big, 3,000 miles away. The distance to the sun is not great, so it, and it's light are subject to the laws of perspective also. We cannot see the light from the Sun when it is on the other side of the flat plane because it is just too far away, it blends in with the horizon. Only a few people know what is at the edge, if there is an edge. If an infinite space is conceivable, then why not an infinite plane? The edge, if there is one, as you can see from the map I provided is past anartica the ring of ice surrounding the earth that has been carved out from the heat from the Sun.As for a reason, I can think of a few, let's start with treason. They wanted to win the space race, so they faked it. Stanley Kubrick coded a confession in "the shining" JFK prophesied going to the moon before 1970, they figured out it was impossible and hired the creator of 2001 a space odysee to help out and show superiority to the world. There may be lots more land past Antarctica. Land is a very valuable resource. Some have referenced the Great Deception as depicted in the bible. The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist. They have convinced us that we are random coinidences in an insignificant corner of a vast universe. Coriolis effect.https://youtu.be...Sundialshttp://www.timetounite.com...